Next Article in Journal
Education and Outreach Program Managers’ Approaches to Engaging with Engineering Students in Summer Research Programs in the U.S.
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring Autonomy in the AI Wilderness: Learner Challenges and Choices
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 12
10.3390/educsci14121370
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

e-Learning Challenges in STEM Education

by
María Magdalena Saldívar-Almorejo
1,*,
Luis Armando Flores-Herrera
1,*,
Raúl Rivera-Blas
1,
Paola Andrea Niño-Suárez
1,
Emmanuel Zenén Rivera-Blas
2,3 and
Nayeli Rodríguez-Contreras
2,3
1
Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Escuela Superior de Cómputo, Nueva Industrial Vallejo, Mexico City 07320, Mexico
2
Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Escuela Superior de Ingeniería Mecánica y Eléctrica, Unidad Azcapotzalco, Santa Catarina, Mexico City 02250, Mexico
3
Tecnológico Nacional de Mexico Campus Instituto Tecnológico Superior de Alvarado Veracruz, Departamento de Ingeniería en Sistemas Computacionales, La Trocha, Alvarado 95270, Veracruz, Mexico
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(12), 1370; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121370
Submission received: 1 December 2024 / Revised: 10 December 2024 / Accepted: 12 December 2024 / Published: 13 December 2024
(This article belongs to the Section STEM Education)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This work reviews the key challenges surrounding teaching Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics subjects known as STEM. The research has uncovered a significant gap between traditional teaching styles and the need to develop and adapt to new remote-learning modalities. The work describes the technological, pedagogical, social, and institutional challenges, finally identifying the importance of their joint interaction. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become evident that STEM educators must increase their awareness and knowledge of instructional models focused on using digital platforms. The current trend is centred on developing remote-learning tools, which will likely become the predominant learning norm as the economy’s viability increases. However, these remote-learning approaches must maintain interaction with the physical world, as understanding real-world phenomena is crucial for improving learning processes. STEM learning through e-learning will have a greater chance of success if academic institutions collaborate with other sectors of society, such as the business sector, to receive feedback for the continuous improvement of the proposed teaching methods.

1. Introduction

The sudden shift to distance learning methods during the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly changed the conventional educational setting. Throughout this time, the COVID-19 pandemic generated a worldwide demand that revealed the technological and human constraints of distance education, prompting a re-evaluation of conventional teaching approaches. This situation exacerbated the digital divide, presenting significant barriers for students and teachers, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to adapt to e-learning. Teachers needed to develop engaging online content and refine their teaching from the traditional style to the new online classrooms. Students experienced social isolation, which had several consequences for the educational process, particularly for hands-on learning experiences. Hybrid-learning models must combine the best online and in-person learning to enhance education rather than substitute one for the other [1]. The use of digital platforms has changed the way students interact with their teachers and with study methods. The use of the new interactive platforms has modified the traditional stay in libraries as a setting for learning. This rapid transition has presented challenges and opportunities as educators and learners have had to adapt to new modes of teaching and learning [2,3]. The study of subjects related to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, known as STEM, requires a significant time commitment to develop the abstract reasoning needed for complex concepts, which is challenging to transfer from traditional textbook approaches to distance-education platforms [4]. The educator plays a decisive role in promoting effective learning and maintaining student motivation during the most complex stages of learning since the teacher sees the need to adapt to the particular characteristics of the students, especially with the advancements and implementations of artificial intelligence (AI) and other educational technologies. While AI can help recognise patterns, the teacher has the human capacity to identify and address individual student learning needs. During the learning process, students experience emotional changes that require the expertise of the teachers to provide support during complex situations. Students may encounter various learning situations throughout a course, such as doubts or knowledge transfer from other subjects. In such cases, the teacher must adapt these changes to the class [5]. The need to adapt to the transition process from traditional learning models to remote learning was a common element faced by teachers worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapid transition to remote learning highlighted a lack of preparedness, particularly for teachers accustomed to traditional classroom settings. Educators were required to adapt their pedagogical approaches to engage students, deliver content, and assess learning remotely. Teachers also faced access disparities and had to navigate these inequities, finding ways to ensure equitable access to learning opportunities. Educators needed to develop innovative strategies to foster student engagement, maintain motivation, and address the isolation experienced by many students [6,7]. The students, for their part, had different experiences during this process, some with difficulty accepting e-learning or adapting to remote teaching platforms but others obtaining benefits such as flexible schedules and reduced travel times. The online learning modality can provide flexibility that benefits STEM students with disabilities, who may encounter difficulties in conventional classroom settings, with transportation, or due to time constraints. The movement towards digital accessibility in education has motivated some institutions to invest in learning platforms, assistive technologies, and resources that enable the full participation of all students in online learning environments [8]. Achieving true accessibility in STEM education for students with disabilities demands an inclusive approach. Beyond physical accommodations, inclusive pedagogical practices, supportive attitudes, and robust support systems are required. Educators must receive appropriate training, equipment, and resources to satisfy the diverse learning adaptations of disabled STEM students. These modifications must include laboratory adaptations and experiments to accommodate learners, for example, those with visual impairments, while emphasising safety and hands-on experiences. Crucially, collaboration between educators, disability service providers, and students themselves is essential to creating truly inclusive STEM learning environments [9,10]. The role of parents during this period also had an essential effect since, in many cases, they played an important role in providing economic and emotional support for their children regardless of their academic level [11]. During this transition, the activities carried out by the students included times of coexistence and personal interaction with other students, which was limited due to confinement and mandatory social distancing [12]. This interaction between students and teachers allowed the evaluation of concepts and the resolution of problems as a group, with more time dedicated to reflecting on the concepts. Effective interaction between the teacher and the student transcends merely transmitting information; it involves the presence of authoritative figures cultivating student development. This dynamic fosters a collaborative learning environment, leading to deeper comprehension, enhanced critical thinking abilities, and a more positive learning experience [13]. Teachers need to create educational tools that allow for improved learning processes and design learning maps that enable the evaluation of learning, which must incorporate an appropriate selection of audiovisual elements, interactivity, and a cognitive structure tailored to multimedia learning [14]. This limitation raises the need to train teachers in new skills, such as project management, since constructing courses through digital tools is a complex process that requires adequate planning and suitable development of technical skills [15]. Another significant influence is related to the telecommunications infrastructure since there are locations that, although located far away, can maintain the same quality of access to internet services. In contrast, others have more difficulties achieving this or face problems keeping good quality, maintenance, and operating conditions of hardware and software. Addressing the complexity of e-learning in STEM education requires collaboration among multiple stakeholders to find comprehensive solutions. A significant challenge is the digital divide, where students from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack reliable internet, suitable devices, or the technical skills to navigate online learning environments. Ensuring accessibility for learners with disabilities goes beyond just basic functionality. The disabilities that students may have are varied. Teachers and decision-makers must accept that the senses of sight, hearing, and touch, as the main sources of knowledge input, cannot be easily replaced. The provision of specialised equipment and alternatives for educational support for these cases generates a decisive difference in the educational context. The same happens with the facilities that support mobility and provide suitable access to the different facilities of the school. These situations brought to the digital environment also present challenges related to the design of new inclusive educational schemes and the challenge of cybersecurity [16]. Learning traditional STEM subjects involves regularly working in laboratories. The creation of virtual scenarios has the challenge of being able to replace these learning experiences. This approach can be highly advantageous for educational institutions in remote regions or with constrained resources as it enables them to access virtual laboratories and interactive experiments that would otherwise demand substantial investments in equipment, materials, and the associated maintenance costs of operating a physical laboratory [17]. Within the development of virtual laboratories, we can mention the work of [18] in which the capabilities of a multiplatform virtual laboratory are shown, which expands the learning capabilities to levels that go beyond what could be achieved with physical laboratories [19]. The development of new interactive activities is required to align the skills of the new generations with the objectives of STEM learning. The new generations are growing up with much greater access to the information they find online. For this reason, virtual laboratories are not only digital scenarios but must have diverse complementary activities [20]. This review article discusses these issues and emphasizes the challenges involved in the transition of using e-learning for teaching STEM subjects and the obstacles in the new forms of remote teaching compared to the traditional teaching.

2. Technological Challenges

In the past, most academic information sources were located in libraries and bookstores; however, this situation has completely changed with the development of information technologies. Accessing specialised STEM books was previously limited by physical location and accessibility. e-learning has opened up access to many electronic books or e-books that were once exclusive or difficult to obtain in physical form. However, abundant digital information requires new skills and literacy for effective research [21]. Nowadays, it is much easier to find books in electronic format than in physical format. Even in this aspect, librarians see the need to be aware of instructional design issues. The relevance of instructional designs directly affects the development and location of new information sources for STEM education and other areas of knowledge [22].

2.1. The Digital Divide

The transition to remote learning through e-learning technologies has posed significant financial challenges for educational institutions and students. Many schools and universities have had to rapidly invest in new digital infrastructure, software licenses, and faculty training to facilitate online and hybrid-learning models. At the same time, students with limited financial resources have struggled to afford devices, internet access, and technological support required to participate in remote coursework effectively. This transition has exacerbated existing inequalities in educational access and outcomes, presenting a significant obstacle to ensuring equitable STEM learning opportunities during the pandemic because the need for remote communication in education exploded, causing a delay in graduation rates in some schools [23]. The technological challenges associated with the development of e-learning, in general, are associated with or linked to the economic capacity of schools, and the costs are initially associated with establishing internet and information storage systems. Another significant influence is the physical location of the school with respect to internet service access since, in remote areas, elements that are already present or more accessible in urban areas may be required, such as electrical energy and telecommunications antennas. However, many causes justify the need to invest in the infrastructure for e-learning. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the need for a rapid shift towards remote and online learning modalities. At the first level, telecommunications infrastructure and high-speed access to internet services are required [24]. In this regard, schools in urban areas have a more significant advantage than remote regions. Given the socioeconomic disparities, policymakers must prioritise enhancing internet connectivity for rural schools and communities. Densely populated urban areas benefit from more significant economic investments, while rural regions face the challenge of lower average incomes and limited competition, leading to higher service costs. Policymakers should prioritise initiatives for online STEM education to address the digital divide that harnesses the benefits of remote learning. These efforts should improve broadband infrastructure and make education more affordable in underserved rural areas [25]. At the second level, the possibility of schools having the infrastructure and human capacity to offer distance-education services is an essential issue. At the third level, we can mention the ability of students also to have the infrastructure to access and adapt to the services offered by schools.

2.2. From Infrastructure to Instruction

Regarding the capacity of schools to offer distance education, it can be mentioned that at least two components are required: technological and human capacity. Within the technological capacity, the school must have servers and systems for high-speed internet that allow the storage and management of the information required to offer distance education. This encompasses the ability to deliver course instruction, store teaching resources, receive and store student submissions, and manage student enrolment, tracking, and graduation processes [26]. In other cases, the ability to accept payments and the issuance of supporting documents such as receipts and invoices are required. This capacity, in turn, requires specialised software to maintain a level of cybersecurity that guarantees the privacy of the information being handled. Regarding human capacity, there are at least two interest groups. The first is in charge of the administration of the online education system; issues related to the environments inside and outside the school have to be included; that is, the staff must be trained to use the software associated with the administration of students, salaries, and perceptions of the school personnel. The second group consists of teachers or instructors who must be trained in using educational technology, video conferencing, virtual classes, content creation, and everything related to distance teaching. Bridging the pedagogical divide requires more than just updating teacher training courses. Teachers must develop personal skills in using educational technology, adapting their teaching methods for online interaction, and revising their pedagogical approaches. They must also learn to use learning management systems, video conferencing tools, content creation software, and accessibility features. A comprehensive shift process is necessary for STEM teachers to transition to online teaching successfully. However, more than training teachers in educational technology, video conferencing, virtual courses, and content creation for distance teaching may be required. Some teachers may resist adapting to these new methods, preferring traditional teaching in the classroom. The time and resources needed to provide comprehensive training for all teachers could be a significant challenge for educational institutions. The successful implementation of e-learning in STEM education faces several substantial hurdles. Firstly, the time and resources required to effectively prepare teachers for new educational technologies and integrate this training into their existing schedules can be challenging. Secondly, the investment in infrastructure, teaching resources, and software licensing must be planned to ensure the deployment of appropriate tools and platforms, mainly because these platforms require constant maintenance or updating. This investment can be particularly problematic for public educational institutions with limited budgets. Finally, the ongoing support teachers and students need to address the various questions and issues that may arise when using new technologies can incur additional costs, further straining the resources of educational institutions [27]. The efficacy of e-learning in STEM disciplines will depend not solely on technological prowess but also on the successful implementation of the new pedagogical approaches.

2.3. Expanding Access to STEM Education

The asynchronous remote teaching modality provides a solution to this described scenario. In this modality, the classes, the teaching material, and the list of activities the student must carry out to accredit the courses are recorded. This asynchronous remote teaching modality requires a robust infrastructure capable of storing a substantial volume of digital content, including slide presentations, text documents, and video recordings of lectures. It also requires systems for registering and immediately evaluating student exams and other assessment exercises. It also requires the capacity to store the documents generated by the students for the administration system that records the registrations and grades obtained in each course. Substantial investment is required in servers and computers to establish the necessary capacity for this mode of instruction. Learning in asynchronous mode allows us to cover a much larger number of students compared to the synchronous mode. This advantage is mainly because the courses are available to the student regardless of the schedule. The physical distance to the classroom is no longer a limitation for course access; this asynchronous condition also eliminates scheduling limitations and allows a larger community to take the courses [28]. Besides the primary investment in the e-learning infrastructure, teaching STEM subjects can be improved by implementing STEM virtual laboratories. STEM subjects have the common element that the student can develop a capacity for the abstraction of technological systems and abstract concepts. The remote laboratory for teaching STEM has proven to have good learning results, especially for students from remote areas with little access to formal facilities. Many universities face challenges launching STEM programs due to limited physical lab resources. However, virtual labs have evolved beyond basic simulations, offering realistic scenarios, remote control of actual equipment, and interactive learning tools that enhance student understanding and engagement. Research demonstrates that virtual labs can be equally or even more effective than traditional labs in driving learning outcomes, as students achieve comparable or better conceptual mastery and skill development, as demonstrated in [29]. Figure 1 shows the identified gaps related to technological challenges for STEM remote education.

2.4. Beyond Physical Boundaries

The interactive and immersive nature of virtual labs increases student interest and motivation. Virtual labs also eliminate geographical barriers, scheduling constraints, and user volume limitations, significantly reducing the costs associated with physical infrastructure and equipment. Acknowledging the continued importance of practical experiences for developing specific technical skills and professional competencies for virtual and physical labs is fundamental to supporting effective STEM education [30]. The development of this tool depends on the desired scope since it can range from a digital application to remote access to facilities that allow the development of educational experiments [31]. Virtual experiments should strive to foster an immersive experience, enabling students to develop a deeper conceptual understanding of the physical phenomenon rather than merely perceiving it through their physical or sensory inputs [32]. While practical experimentation holds value, authentic learning transcends physical manipulation and requires active mental engagement, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Virtual labs possess the capacity to cultivate these cognitive capabilities; they can potentially democratise access to sophisticated equipment and resources, challenging the conventional notion that practice is the pinnacle of effective learning. In contrast to physical laboratories, virtual counterparts can be more readily adapted and extended, as exemplified by flight simulators, which enable broader cognitive development for learners. The design of the virtual experiments should prioritise a research approach to cultivate deeper conceptual comprehension of the physical phenomena rather than limiting their experience to mere observation [33]. Table 1 displays a few examples of virtual laboratories applied to STEM disciplines. Most of them recreate experimental tests with a graphical interface. In many cases of virtual laboratories, they have pre and post-testing or questionnaires for student feedback. These virtual laboratories can recreate structural errors or case analyses in laboratory scenarios, and the information can be recorded for each student. The main gaps they can help to reduce are the limited access to course resources and access to real laboratories, which can also be very helpful in reducing insufficient practical experiences.

3. Pedagogical Challenges

An additional aspect pertains to the delivery of the courses, which directly involves the teachers; this component requires more training for educators. It is complex because the teacher must accept that the remote teaching modality requires a significant change in the traditional way of teaching. The preparation of study material that traditionally used the blackboard and books now sees the need to change to a set of digital tools more compatible with the interaction style of new generations. Within these tools are software for teaching and preparing materials for collaborative presentations. These tools must allow students to immerse themselves in the topics being taught.

3.1. Rethinking Pedagogy for STEM e-Learning

Given the remote nature of instruction, teachers must employ diverse strategies to sustain student engagement and control interactive teaching methods to maintain their interest and participation in the class. Teachers can be trained in using software and developing interactive augmented reality experiences to enhance student engagement and interest in the course content. However, the success of this modality does not end with technical training in the use of digital tools. Teachers are also facing a significant change in the attitudes of new generations regarding online interaction. This change means that teachers also require training at different pedagogical levels to understand these generational changes and know how to interact. Teachers face increased public exposure, particularly in synchronous online sessions with the students interacting directly. In many cases, these classes are recorded, and the behaviours of both teachers and students are likely to be exposed to social networks. This situation adds extra tension to the educational environment due to this public exposure and raises questions about the effects of this prolonged exposure. Pedagogical models adapted to remote learning must include active participation of students, docents, designers, advisors, tutors, and peer interaction as critical elements for effective learning. Recognising that e-learning for STEM subjects goes beyond passive video lectures is essential; it is a process that can take time to develop. However, it can significantly facilitate and accelerate the understanding of abstract concepts that, in some cases of traditional education, depend mainly on the individual capacity and experience of the teacher. These elements can reduce the understanding capacity gap, improve engagement, promote deeper information processing, and enhance knowledge retention [45]. As students gain increased exposure to a broader range of information and interactions with peers globally, the teacher evolves from the principal source of expertise to a facilitator who guides and supports student learning. The learning environment or classroom is evolving into a more collaborative approach. This shift should extend beyond the classroom, inspiring students to contribute rather than absorb data and promoting collaboration among STEM teachers [46].

3.2. e-Learning Visibility

The presence of visual means for teaching, such as video recordings of synchronous online classes, also means that teachers are not only evaluated based on their pedagogical skills and content knowledge but are observed and scrutinised more closely by a wider audience. The heightened visibility and scrutiny of pedagogical practices and student interactions stemming from the recording and sharing of online classes on social media platforms can produce stress and anxiety in the educational environment. This sensitive level of visibility and accountability can be a challenging aspect of the shift to remote instruction as teachers must adapt their teaching styles and classroom management techniques to a more transparent delivery method. The implications of public exposure require adequate training. For famous artists accustomed to public attention, this exposure generates various reactions that affect their careers. For teachers specialised in STEM subjects, public exposure to the internet must also have important implications and, therefore, requires significant educational support [47,48].
This situation raises the question of whether the increased use of e-learning technologies in STEM education may lead to greater global standardisation of educational content and outcomes. Specifically, adopting e-learning platforms and digital instructional materials could contribute to the establishment of more uniform knowledge and skill standards across different academic institutions and regions. This potential for greater global alignment of STEM curricula requires essential consideration. The teacher may not be the sole judge of course content and evaluation but a facilitator and guide for students navigating these technology-driven learning experiences. Technology empowers students to access vast amounts of information rapidly. Rather than merely providing information, teachers must guide and develop critical thinking to identify relevant resources for the learning community [46]. Applying metaheuristic optimisation techniques to educational processes may lead to specialised courses demonstrating global effectiveness, potentially resulting in international standardisation of academic approaches. This scenario raises the critical question of whether such standardisation would adequately preserve cultural identity and diversity across different regions. While the standardisation of STEM curricula and assessments could provide benefits in terms of efficiency and alignment of learning outcomes, there is a risk that it could diminish the unique cultural influences and pedagogical approaches that have traditionally characterised education in various parts of the world.

3.3. Preserving Cultural Identity

Adopting e-learning technologies and optimising educational processes must not come at the expense of preserving the rich cultural heritage and diversity reflected in the educational systems of different regions and communities [49,50]. Learning software and cell phone applications developed to obtain standardisation for learning STEM subjects can provide benefits such as increased accessibility, consistency in curriculum, and potential cost savings. However, they may also present disadvantages like reduced flexibility, cultural homogenisation, and the risk of overreliance on technology. It is essential that these tools preserve pedagogical diversity and effectively serve the needs of diverse learners. Effective technology deployment should foster social inclusivity and reduce or limit educational inequalities. One possible option to reduce this gap is to incorporate various learning formats in which a more personalised approach to the coverage of STEM topics can be considered, for instance, in social sectors unfamiliar with STEM terminology [51]. Figure 2 shows the identified gaps affecting the pedagogical challenges for STEM e-learning education. These are elements that teachers have to face, and the question arises as to how many will be willing and ready to undertake the required effort to adapt to these changes.
After analysing the technological and pedagogical challenges, we can identify that, as illustrated in Figure 3, STEM educators and students navigate the complex digital landscape, albeit with distinct challenges that shape their experiences. Educators grapple with the management of digital assets, the development of a curriculum that effectively incorporates emerging technologies, the process of digitising content, and the implementation of innovative digital assessment methods. Conversely, students face the daunting challenge of digital overload, navigating abundant online resources and platforms while seeking meaningful engagement within virtual learning communities and adapting to the dynamic nature of evolving learning environments. However, both groups share a standard set of concerns that transcend their roles. These include ensuring online safety and privacy, implementing personalised learning strategies catering to diverse learning styles and preferences, and acquiring essential technical proficiency.

4. Social and Institutional Challenges

Socioeconomic disparities among educational institutions can create barriers to adopting e-learning for STEM subjects; because of this, standardisation in STEM education could be important for some topics to reduce this disparity. Despite the need for internet literacy worldwide, increasing segments of society are becoming more aware of technological capabilities and demanding their integration into modern educational programs. This feeling also includes embracing diverse cultures and continuous learning beyond conventional classrooms and age [52]. From an institutional perspective, successfully adopting e-learning technologies for STEM education requires the inclusion of more multidisciplinary professionals to create a better process. Institutional policies must consider and plan the integration of information technologies to enable effective and sustainable implementation. The teacher now finds a series of extra activities. Generating digital material requires knowledge to produce images and videos that allow the integration of bibliographic information. Applying these skills also represents a challenge whose magnitude may depend on the discipline of study since some may be closer to managing digital tools than others. The learning experience, in that sense, can elicit emotional responses, such as positive or negative attitudes and levels of acceptance or rejection [53]. Students must then go through experiences that generate learning under a pedagogical framework. Augmented reality can have a powerful visual impact that can engage students in the subject matter. However, these virtual scenarios must be aligned with clear learning objectives and a sound pedagogical framework to provide structure and guidance. Teachers must explore new ways to incorporate augmented reality as an effective and complementary educational tool [54]. Consequently, the academic society must understand the processes of creating virtual environments and their effects on students, including developing deep knowledge of the design and implementation of virtual laboratories, simulations, and other digital learning tools. The teacher needs to know how these virtual environments can impact student engagement, knowledge retention, and the overall learning experience.

4.1. Bridging the Gap Together with Publishers and Partners

The transition to e-learning may also have implications for textbook publishers. The scope that an institution dedicated to producing teaching materials can have is more significant than a single teacher’s capacity. Publishing companies have more information and resources to enhance the evolution of textbooks, the themes, and the educational needs that society requires. Publishing companies can utilise their established expertise and broad audience to create comprehensive, high-quality instructional materials optimised for e-learning in STEM fields, incorporating insights from diverse economic environments [55]. With the close collaboration between educational institutions and teachers, publishers can play a crucial role in facilitating the successful adoption and integration of e-learning technologies in STEM subjects. They can provide their expertise to develop exceptional, engaging, and relevant e-learning resources that empower both teachers and students to thrive in the digital age. This collaborative approach can involve suitable management to work closely with instructors to understand their pedagogical strategies and the specific learning needs of students. Publishers can then use this insight to create e-learning materials tailored to address those needs, such as developing interactive simulations, virtual laboratories, or other digital tools that enhance conceptual understanding and critical thinking. Publishers can be crucial in ensuring these e-learning resources are accessible and inclusive [56]. This advantage can better develop the transition processes necessary for teachers to adopt new materials due to the proximity of these companies to educational institutions. When a single teacher develops the materials, they may find limitations regarding the scope and context for which the teaching material is created. They also face a limited capacity for feedback and responsiveness towards the students and the course quality they can develop. Another limiting element is related to the economic capacity that the teacher may have concerning a publishing house since some development software requires payment of licenses and the use of computer equipment with good capacity. These computer equipment must have essential capabilities for managing graphics and network communication to maintain good quality during the development of the courses [57].

4.2. Rethinking Assessment in STEM e-Learning

The integration of diverse pedagogical approaches poses a critical challenge in the development of e-learning for STEM education. STEM disciplines are foundational to technological advancement and understanding economic and cultural processes. The current social trends demand a shift towards greater inclusion, where the adaptation process no longer assumes a unidirectional student adjustment to the classroom. Instead, the diversity of student learning styles can affect teaching methodologies, requiring a more comprehensive understanding of societal dynamics in preparing instructional materials [58]. The cultural context of e-learning adaptation also changes the role of assessments. Beyond being a metric to gauge individual student capabilities, evaluations elicit emotional responses that must be considered. e-learning pedagogical approaches should emphasise collaborative learning to counter the misconception that STEM grades define intellectual aptitude or intelligence level. The various factors contributing to assessments can elicit variable emotional states that directly influence student academic performance. Therefore, a balanced evaluation framework is required to enable effective educational processes and identify students with exceptional abilities. Establishing a well-rounded assessment system is essential to improve education objectives. The question here is whether grading in school helps to prepare students for the grading and performance requirements in the work environment. The specific answer for STEM topics is complex because the tangible application of science theories must be included, not just abstract knowledge. Practical assessment in STEM education should evaluate the ability to apply their understanding to real-world problems and scenarios rather than focusing solely on standardised test scores or grades. This evaluation can better prepare students for the demands they will face in their future careers [59].
In the 21st century, grading must evolve beyond a singular emphasis on standardised testing. Instead, a more comprehensive approach is required to accurately capture the diverse range of skills, knowledge, and competencies that students acquire throughout their educational journeys. This shift is crucial, as it recognises that student learning and achievement cannot be adequately measured through a narrow lens of standardised assessments alone. An evaluation framework should incorporate various assessment methods, such as projects, portfolio demonstrations, and performance tasks, to provide a holistic understanding of each student’s growth and development. Considering new grading forms with a more inclusive and nuanced approach, educational institutions can better support various learning needs and strengths, fostering a more equitable and inclusive learning environment [60].

4.3. Connecting STEM e-Learning with Contemporary Learners

Depending on the economic region, a stereotypical view of economic success may differ from professional reality. The time and effort required to learn STEM subjects may significantly differ from some idealised scenarios of success that may be presented in the media. Learning programs must focus on the technical part of the study subject and the context involved during and after the learning process. Many dropouts may occur during the STEM learning process due to the barriers that arise along the way and the reality the STEM professional faces. Salary perception may sometimes not represent the value or effort made to learn STEM subjects [61]. It is important to recognise that new generations of students are growing up in a digital context that allows them to quickly change their decisions. The personalised attention of students and support from experienced teachers can help to improve their understanding of their future professional life decisions [62]. Incorporating complementary learning experiences, such as outdoor activities, natural phenomena exploration, and the environmental implications of STEM innovations, can potentially bridge the perceived disconnect between STEM education and professional reality. For example, integrating the study of animal behaviour across some STEM disciplines, not only in veterinary or biology but also in engineering and mathematics, can enhance the relevance and appeal of these subjects for learners. This interdisciplinary approach can also positively influence ethical reflections and professional behaviours in STEM disciplines [63,64].

5. Emerging Solutions and Future Directions

Achieving enhanced STEM learning through e-learning tools requires a complex approach. As outlined previously, collaborative efforts among diverse institutions are essential. The cooperative efforts among educational institutions, private sector organisations, and technology providers constitute a crucial foundation for enhancing STEM education and bolstering instructional technology integration. Collaboration between academia and industry is vital to better leveraging the potential of STEM education. Through collaborative agreements, theoretical knowledge can be better applied to real problems. The enrichment of education stemming from student involvement in real industry projects provides more benefits. With the adoption of real experiences, students develop skills that can be applied to improve or solve problems in different scientific fields [65]. During this integration, it is essential to create customised programs for the needs of each educational level and desired skill. For instance, an engineering company with established commercial products can adapt parts of its expertise to explain physical phenomena better and address the specific learning objectives and competencies required by advanced STEM programs. This collaboration could involve the development of specialised simulations, virtual labs, or interactive modules that provide valuable experience for learning engineering principles in real-world problems.

5.1. Adapting STEM e-Learning for the Future Workforce

Similarly, industry partners can work with educators to create learning resources that bridge the gap between theoretical models and real-world applications, preparing students for the demands of their future careers. Collaboration between academia and industry is critical to enhancing STEM education’s future relevance and effectiveness. Regulatory bodies in education should mandate and facilitate this collaboration to modernise educational programs, leveraging input from innovation creators to enrich the theoretical foundations. This collaboration has already proven to be successful; the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) has achieved accreditation programs through multidisciplinary collaborative work. This organisation has integrated representatives from various scientific disciplines and countries. They have collaborated closely with other institutions, such as the American Chemical Society’s (ACS) approval programs for forensic research, as well as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). This integration has led to an understanding of how applying chemical knowledge to forensic science has improved the experience and motivation of learning chemistry, with implications for both technical and legal decision-making aspects [66]. Educational pathways should be established at previous or basic levels to bridge the gap from the foundational to the advanced stages; academia, government, and private companies must engage in mutual dialogue to communicate their respective needs and capabilities, enabling optimal courses of action. Improving communication among stakeholders is crucial for the future development of STEM subjects. Without effective dialogue, the needs of the various parties involved will not be sufficiently identified, and teaching approaches will continue to adhere to traditional methods [67]. Integrating diverse pedagogical approaches and learning styles is critical in developing e-learning for STEM education. Facing the question of why we should innovate in education, it can be said that, among other things, innovation can lead to unique strengths that can help achieve a more efficient and inclusive learning environment. This adaptability is needed for contemporary STEM students with diverse needs and preferences, ultimately enhancing their educational experiences and preparing them for success in the 21st-century workforce. The role of STEM subject specialists must be reoriented to improve teaching performance, and teachers need to apply new educational technology. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen teacher training programs that update technical knowledge and develop digital skills and innovative teaching approaches to promote meaningful and engaging learning experiences for students [68].

5.2. A Shared Vision to Enhance STEM e-Learning

Transforming the approach of businesses and society towards STEM education is essential for enacting meaningful change because both play a crucial role in shaping the educational landscape and can provide the necessary resources and support for STEM learning. By developing a culture that values STEM education and recognises its importance for the future workforce and societal progress, businesses and society can actively contribute to developing and implementing effective e-learning solutions in STEM fields. This collaborative effort can foster a more supportive and enabling environment for e-learning to thrive, ultimately enhancing the accessibility, engagement, and outcomes of STEM education for all students. For example, establishing donation systems to provide technological tools and services can serve as a valuable component in advancing the field of education and contribute to incentives for tax payments because bureaucratic regulations and protocols for requesting resources for schools can be a decisive factor that hinders and discourages the necessary efforts to integrate technologies into educational processes [69]. Recognising that progress in STEM education cannot be achieved solely through technological solutions is important; instead, it requires a comprehensive approach encompassing curriculum design, teacher training, and institutional collaboration. This holistic strategy should also prioritise integrating diverse pedagogical methods and learning styles to create more inclusive and engaging e-learning environments for STEM students.

5.3. Evolving with the Digital Age

Effective professional development programs for STEM educators must be established to enhance their digital competencies and teaching methodologies, enabling them to foster meaningful learning experiences for their students beyond the solution of numerical exercises to achieve proper adaptation of theories in real scenarios. Figure 4 summarises important milestones identified in the development of e-learning and its relationship with STEM. As the development of e-learning progresses, STEM learning finds more excellent coverage in education. This timeline divides the evolution of e-learning, from its early beginnings through its expansion and future consolidation, taking as a reference times the COVID-19 period and the present year 2024. Alongside this, the timeline showcases the parallel evolution of STEM education, including more digital tools. We can consider synthetically that the emergence of online platforms has significantly contributed to the evolution of STEM education. These platforms have enabled remote access to global resources and laid the foundations for integrating information technology (IT) into schools. Consequently, digital tools like virtual laboratories and simulators have become essential, while collaborations between educational institutions and companies have strengthened opportunities for practical learning. The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the shift towards hybrid education, driving substantial investment in digital infrastructure. In the future, new advancements in digital tools and the strengthening of ties between education and industry will continue to shape STEM education, potentially with the support of AI.

6. Discussion

The review of the challenges in teaching STEM disciplines and integrating e-learning has revealed that STEM education can significantly benefit from e-learning and educational designs that combine these two modalities. Such integrative approaches enable more interactive and collaborative learning, allowing students to apply STEM concepts through practical projects implemented in virtual environments, as evidenced by the success stories mentioned. e-learning opens up several possibilities for accessing online educational resources that enrich STEM teaching, enabling students to engage with tutorials, simulations, and interactive tools to explore complex concepts from anywhere and at any time, mainly when physical access to educational institutions is limited. This helps students to develop critical technology skills needed for the future job market, giving them a competitive advantage. These skills are developed not only in students but also in the collaborative teams involved in the holistic design of this type of training, including designers, teachers, technologists, authorities, and even educational and technological institutions and the labour market. This student-centred approach allows e-learning platforms to personalise learning according to individual needs, enabling students to progress at their own pace and focus on areas of interest or improvement. However, this also reveals a significant gap between traditional methods and new distance learning modalities, highlighting the urgent need for educational institutions, teachers, and trainers to adapt to instructional models that integrate digital platforms. Educators must adopt a more collaborative approach within and outside educational institutions to improve STEM education and develop distance learning experiences and tools that leverage technology and generate synergy with the physical world for a deeper understanding of scientific phenomena. The intersection between STEM and e-learning presents a significant opportunity to transform contemporary education. However, it can only be successfully achieved through a holistic, systemic, and collaborative approach involving educational communities in all their roles, industrial sectors, society, and government to maximise the potential of this synergy.

7. Conclusions

Integrating e-learning into STEM education faces several persistent challenges, including the critical need for collaborative efforts across diverse institutions, adapting to diverse learning styles and preferences among contemporary students, and transforming societal perceptions and attitudes towards STEM disciplines. This approach must involve thoughtful curriculum design, _targeted teacher training and professional development, and sustained institutional collaboration and cooperation. The synergy between educational entities, private enterprises, and technology providers is essential in developing customised e-learning solutions that cater to STEM learners’ unique needs and requirements at different educational levels, from foundational to advanced stages. Fostering inclusive and engaging learning environments through incorporating innovative pedagogical approaches and strengthening teacher training programs are crucial elements in enhancing the overall effectiveness and impact of e-learning in STEM education. Ultimately, the long-term success of e-learning in STEM education lies in the ability to seamlessly integrate modern technologies, transformative pedagogical practices, and institutionalised cooperation and coordination. Despite its potential, e-learning in STEM often struggles with accessibility issues, widening the digital divide and failing to fully engage students, especially those from underprivileged backgrounds or with disabilities. Without specific solutions, there is a risk of leaving many students behind. This comprehensive strategy allows students to succeed in the constantly changing technology world. It enables e-learning to change STEM education completely, creating future generations of creative leaders and effective problem solvers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.M.S.-A. and L.A.F.-H.; methodology, R.R.-B. and E.Z.R.-B.; validation, P.A.N.-S.; investigation, N.R.-C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Secretaría de Investigación y Posgrado. Grant Numbers 20232057 and 20242562.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analysed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Gupta, M. Impact of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic on Classroom Teaching: Challenges of Online Classes and Solutions. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2021, 10, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Pinatil, L.; Ramos, A. Theory of Adaptation of Educators Teaching Technology-Based Courses. Recoletos Multidiscip. Res. J. 2023, 11, 103–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wang, F.; Reeves, T.C. Why Do Teachers Need to Use Technology in Their Classrooms? Issues, Problems, and Solutions. Comput. Sch. 2003, 20, 49–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kiazai, A.N.; Siddiqua, N.; Waheed, Z. Challenges in Implementing STEM Education and Role of Teacher Education Programs in Mitigating These Challenges. Int. J. Distance Educ. E-Learn. 2020, 5, 123–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kanchon, M.K.H.; Sadman, M.; Nabila, K.F.; Tarannum, R.; Khan, R. Enhancing Personalized Learning: AI-Driven Identification of Learning Styles and Content Modification Strategies. Int. J. Cogn. Comput. Eng. 2024, 5, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wieselmann, J.R.; Crotty, E.A. Teaching during COVID-19: Reflections of Early-Career Science Teachers. Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res. 2022, 4, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gillis, A.; Krull, L.M. COVID-19 Remote Learning Transition in Spring 2020: Class Structures, Student Perceptions, and Inequality in College Courses. Teach. Sociol. 2020, 48, 283–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Selco, J.I.; Habbak, M. Stem Students’ Perceptions on Emergency Online Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges and Successes. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Koutsoklenis, A.; Karagianni, Y. Neoliberal–Neoconservative Educational Reforms and the Inclusion in Education of Disabled Students in Greece: The Case of the Institution of Special Assistant. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open 2024, 9, 100863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mayer, Y.; Hershler, L.D.; Bulk, L.Y.; Cook, C.; Belliveau, G.; Xie, K.; Jarus, T. Promoting Inclusion for Disabled Students in Healthcare Education: Using Research-Based Theatre to Enhance Knowledge and Empathy. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2024, 79, 104085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lenka Dedkova, D.S.; Just, M. Digital Security in Families: The Sources of Information Relate to the Active Mediation of Internet Safety and Parental Internet Skills. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2022, 41, 1052–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Müller, F.; Goudeau, S.; Stephens, N.M.; Aelenei, C.; Sanitioso, R.B. Social-Class Inequalities in Distance Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Digital Divide, Cultural Mismatch, and Psychological Barriers. Int. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2023, 36, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hagenauer, G.; Volet, S.E. Teacher–Student Relationship at University: An Important yet under-Researched Field. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 2014, 40, 370–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Groshans, G.R.; Mikhailova, E.A.; Post, C.J.; Schlautman, M.A.; Carbajales-Dale, P.; Payne, K.S.; Carbajales-Dale, P.; Payne, K.S.; Carbajales-Dale, P.; Payne, K.S.; et al. Digital Story Map Learning for STEM Disciplines. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Garzón Artacho, E.; Martínez, T.S.; Ortega Martín, J.L.; Marín Marín, J.A.; Gómez García, G. Teacher Training in Lifelong Learning—The Importance of Digital Competence in the Encouragement of Teaching Innovation. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Walker, J.J.; Swaid, S.; Mortazvi, M. E-Learning Using Cyberinfrastructure. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 2012, 7, 53–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chimalakonda, S.; Nori, K.V. A Family of Software Product Lines in Educational Technologies. Computing 2020, 102, 1765–1792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Maiti, A.; Maxwell, A.D.; Kist, A.A.; Orwin, L. Integrating Enquiry-Based Learning Pedagogies and Remote Access Laboratory for STEM Education. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Istanbul, Turkey, 3–5 April 2014; pp. 706–712. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lowe, D.; Murray, S.; Lindsay, E.; Liu, D. Evolving Remote Laboratory Architectures to Leverage Emerging Internet Technologies. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 2009, 2, 289–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Worlitz, J.; Branke, M.; Troike, M.; Hettling, L.; Woll, R. The Contribution of Learning, Teaching and Assessment Activities to the Development of 21 St Century STEM Competencies. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE), Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 4–7 December 2018; pp. 316–321. [Google Scholar]
  21. Johnson-Barlow, E.M.; Lehnen, C. A Scoping Review of the Application of Systematic Instructional Design and Instructional Design Models by Academic Librarians. J. Acad. Librariansh. 2021, 47, 102382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Craig, C.A.; Petrun Sayers, E.L.; Gilbertz, S.; Karabas, I. The Development and Evaluation of Interdisciplinary STEM, Sustainability, and Management Curriculum. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2022, 20, 100652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cullinan, J.; Flannery, D.; Harold, J.; Lyons, S.; Palcic, D. The Disconnected: COVID-19 and Disparities in Access to Quality Broadband for Higher Education Students. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2021, 18, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Barrot, J.S.; Llenares, I.I.; del Rosario, L.S. Students’ Online Learning Challenges during the Pandemic and How They Cope with Them: The Case of the Philippines. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 7321–7338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. LaRose, R.; Gregg, J.L.; Strover, S.; Straubhaar, J.; Carpenter, S. Closing the Rural Broadband Gap: Promoting Adoption of the Internet in Rural America. Telecomm. Policy 2007, 31, 359–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Shih, T.K.; Antoni, G.D.; Arndt, T.; Asirvatham, A.; Chang, C.-T.; Chee, Y.S.; Dow, C.-R.; Hung, J.C.; Jin, Q.; Jung, I.; et al. A Survey of Distance Education Challenges and Technologies. Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol. 2003, 1, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Dikkers, A.G. The Intersection of Online and Face-to-Face Teaching: Implications for Virtual School Teacher Practice and Professional Development. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2015, 47, 139–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Singh, V.; Khasawneh, M.T.; Bowling, S.R.; Kaewkuekool, S.; Jiang, X.; Gramopadhye, A.K. The Evaluation of Alternate Learning Systems in an Industrial Engineering Course: Asynchronous, Synchronous and Classroom. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2004, 33, 495–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Au, E.H.; Lee, J.J. Virtual Reality in Education: A Tool for Learning in the Experience Age. Int. J. Innov. Educ. 2017, 4, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Schrader, C.; Diekmann, C.; Schulz, P.; Mack, N.; Bohrmann-Linde, C.; Zeller, D. Hands-on Training: Effects on Virtual Presence, Learning-Centered Emotions, Cognitive Load and Learning Outcome When Learning with Virtual Reality. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. 2024, 16, 100487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nickerson, J.V.; Corter, J.E.; Esche, S.K.; Chassapis, C. A Model for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Remote Engineering Laboratories and Simulations in Education. Comput. Educ. 2007, 49, 708–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Flegr, S.; Kuhn, J.; Scheiter, K. How to Foster STEM Learning during Covid-19 Remote Schooling: Combining Virtual and Video Experiments. Learn. Instr. 2023, 86, 101778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ibrahem, U.M.; Alsaif, B.S.; Alblaihed, M.; Ahmed, S.S.I.; Alshrif, H.A.; Abdulkader, R.A.; Diab, H.M. Interaction Between Cognitive Styles and Genders When Using Virtual Laboratories and Its Influence on Students of Health College’s Laboratory Skills and Cognitive Load during the Corona Pandemic. Heliyon 2022, 8, e09213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Bos, B. Virtual Math Objects with Pedagogical, Mathematical, and Cognitive Fidelity. Comput. Human Behav. 2009, 25, 521–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. August, S.E.; Hammers, M.L.; Murphy, D.B.; Neyer, A.; Gueye, P.; Thames, R.Q. Virtual Engineering Sciences Learning Lab: Giving STEM Education a Second Life. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 2016, 9, 18–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Garcia-Zubia, J.; Cuadros, J.; Romero, S.; Hernandez-Jayo, U.; Orduna, P.; Guenaga, M.; Gonzalez-Sabate, L.; Gustavsson, I. Empirical Analysis of the Use of the VISIR Remote Lab in Teaching Analog Electronics. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2017, 60, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Thees, M.; Kapp, S.; Strzys, M.P.; Beil, F.; Lukowicz, P.; Kuhn, J. Effects of Augmented Reality on Learning and Cognitive Load in University Physics Laboratory Courses. Comput. Human Behav. 2020, 108, 106316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Torres-Freyermuth, A.; Medellín, G.; Martín, G.U.; Puleo, J.A. A Virtual Laboratory for Conducting “Hands-on” Experiments on Water Wave Mechanics. Cont. Shelf Res. 2022, 243, 104760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Nurhasanah, Y.; Pinandoyo, D.; Alamsyah, M.R.; Prasetyo, E.; Zukri, N.R. The Development of a Coliform Detection Game As A Part of Android—Based Virtual Food Safety Laboratory to Support Online Learning. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2023, 227, 1002–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Amankwaa, A.O.; Gjergo, V.; Hamagareb, S. Developing a Virtual Laboratory Module for Forensic Science Degree Programmes. Sci. Justice 2023, 63, 295–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhou, Z.; Oveissi, F.; Langrish, T. Applications of Augmented Reality (AR) in Chemical Engineering Education: Virtual Laboratory Work Demonstration to Digital Twin Development. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2024, 188, 108784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kadri, M.; Boubakri, F.-E.; Kaghat, F.-Z.; Azough, A.; Zidani, K.A. IVAL: Immersive Virtual Anatomy Laboratory for Enhancing Medical Education Based on Virtual Reality and Serious Games, Design, Implementation, and Evaluation. Entertain. Comput. 2024, 49, 100624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Pottgießer, V.; Preim, B.; Saalfeld, P.; Vahlbruch, J.-W.; Walther, C. Virtual Radionuclide Laboratory: An e-Learning Solution for a Tailored Training Event. Nucl. Eng. Des. 2024, 423, 113173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Liu, W.; Li, X.; Liu, M.; Cui, H.; Huang, J.; Pang, Y.; Ma, J. Virtual Laboratory Enabled Constitutive Modelling of Dual Phase Steels. Int. J. Plast. 2024, 175, 103930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Rehn, N.; Maor, D.; McConney, A. The Specific Skills Required of Teachers Who Deliver K–12 Distance Education Courses by Synchronous Videoconference: Implications for Training and Professional Development. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2018, 27, 417–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Shaffer, D.W.; Nash, P.; Ruis, A.R. Technology and the New Professionalization of Teaching. Teach. Coll. Rec. Voice Scholarsh. Educ. 2015, 117, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Herliantari, H.; Abdurrahman; Herlina, K. Teachers Perceptions and Anxiety about Using Multimedia in Learning Geometry Optics Concept: A Preliminary Research on STEM Learning Makerspace. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1572, 012066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fernández-Batanero, J.-M.; Román-Graván, P.; Reyes-Rebollo, M.-M.; Montenegro-Rueda, M. Impact of Educational Technology on Teacher Stress and Anxiety: A Literature Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Rasheed, R.A.; Kamsin, A.; Abdullah, N.A. Challenges in the Online Component of Blended Learning: A Systematic Review. Comput. Educ. 2020, 144, 103701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mufeti, T. Learning in Namibia: An Opportune Solution or an Impediment to Learning?—The Case at the University of Namibia. Int. J. Internet Educ. 2020, 19, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Chen, D.F.; Du, H.; Li, W.H. Bioparticle Separation and Manipulation Using Dielectrophoresis. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2007, 133, 329–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hazen, B.T.; Wu, Y.; Sankar, C.S. Factors That Influence Dissemination in Engineering Education. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2012, 55, 384–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mohamad, S.; Husnin, H. Teachers’ Perception of the Use of Augmented Reality (AR) Modules in Teaching and Learning. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2023, 13, 8–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wu, H.-K.; Lee, S.W.-Y.; Chang, H.-Y.; Liang, J.-C. Current Status, Opportunities and Challenges of Augmented Reality in Education. Comput. Educ. 2013, 62, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Widya; Rifandi, R.; Rahmi, Y.L. STEM Education to Fulfil the 21st Century Demand: A Literature Review. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1317, 12208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Herro, D.; Quigley, C.; Jacques, L.A. Examining Technology Integration in Middle School STEAM Units. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2018, 27, 485–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Manyukova, N.; Nikonova, E.; Sliva, M. Training Bachelors in the Transition to the Use of Domestic Office Software. SHS Web Conf. 2018, 55, 03027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Adeoye, B.F. Culturally Different Learning Styles in Online Learning Environments. Int. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. Educ. 2011, 7, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. McMillan, J.H.; Myran, S.; Workman, D. Elementary Teachers’ Classroom Assessment and Grading Practices. J. Educ. Res. 2002, 95, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tai, J.; Mahoney, P.; Ajjawi, R.; Bearman, M.; Dargusch, J.; Dracup, M.; Harris, L. How Are Examinations Inclusive for Students with Disabilities in Higher Education? A Sociomaterial Analysis. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2023, 48, 390–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ober, T.M.; Lehman, B.A.; Gooch, R.; Oluwalana, O.; Solyst, J.; Phelps, G.; Hamilton, L.S. Culturally Responsive Personalized Learning: Recommendations for a Working Definition and Framework. ETS Res. Rep. Ser. 2023, 2023, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ziatdinov, R.; Cilliers, J. Generation Alpha: Understanding the Next Cohort of University Students. Eur. J. Contemp. Educ. 2021, 10, 783–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kelley, T.R.; Knowles, J.G. A Conceptual Framework for Integrated STEM Education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2016, 3, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Annemie Struyf Haydée De Loof, J.B.P.; Petegem, P. Van Students’ Engagement in Different STEM Learning Environments: Integrated STEM Education as Promising Practice? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2019, 41, 1387–1407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Carlisle, D.L.; Weaver, G.C. STEM Education Centers: Catalyzing the Improvement of Undergraduate STEM Education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2018, 5, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Harper-Leatherman, A.S.; Huang, L. Introduction to Teaching Chemistry with Forensic Science. In ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society; Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data; ACS Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; pp. 1–11. ISBN 9780841234833. [Google Scholar]
  67. Wei, F.; Yang, X.; Yu, X.; Zhou, H. Exploration and Practice of Deepening Industry-Education Integration Mechanism in Guangxi Applied Undergraduate Universities and Colleges. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Social Science and Higher Education (ICSSHE 2020), Xiamen, China, 27–29 November 2020; Atlantis Press: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  68. Gayyur, T.S. Exploring TPACK Skills of Prospective Teachers and Challenges Faced in Digital Technology Integration in Pakistan. J. Dev. Soc. Sci. 2021, 2, 226–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Nwakpuda, E.I. Major Donors and Higher Education: Are STEM Donors Different from Other Donors? Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Q. 2020, 49, 969–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Education 14 01370 g001
Figure 1. Identified gaps to overcome the technological challenges.
Figure 1. Identified gaps to overcome the technological challenges.
Education 14 01370 g001
Education 14 01370 g002
Figure 2. Identified gaps affecting the pedagogical challenges.
Figure 2. Identified gaps affecting the pedagogical challenges.
Education 14 01370 g002
Education 14 01370 g003
Figure 3. Challenges in e-learning STEM for students and educators.
Figure 3. Challenges in e-learning STEM for students and educators.
Education 14 01370 g003
Education 14 01370 g004
Figure 4. Inclusion of STEM in e-learning evolution.
Figure 4. Inclusion of STEM in e-learning evolution.
Education 14 01370 g004
Table 1. Virtual laboratories applied to STEM-related topics.
Table 1. Virtual laboratories applied to STEM-related topics.
No.DisciplineYearReference
1Mathematics2009[34]
2Collaborative games2016[35]
3Analog electronics2017[36]
4Physics2020[37]
5Water wave2022[38]
6Water wave2022[38]
7Food safety2023[39]
8Forensic science2023[40]
9Chemical2024[41]
10Virtual anatomy2024[42]
11Radionuclide2024[43]
12Mechanical properties2024[44]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Saldívar-Almorejo, M.M.; Flores-Herrera, L.A.; Rivera-Blas, R.; Niño-Suárez, P.A.; Rivera-Blas, E.Z.; Rodríguez-Contreras, N. e-Learning Challenges in STEM Education. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 1370. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121370

AMA Style

Saldívar-Almorejo MM, Flores-Herrera LA, Rivera-Blas R, Niño-Suárez PA, Rivera-Blas EZ, Rodríguez-Contreras N. e-Learning Challenges in STEM Education. Education Sciences. 2024; 14(12):1370. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121370

Chicago/Turabian Style

Saldívar-Almorejo, María Magdalena, Luis Armando Flores-Herrera, Raúl Rivera-Blas, Paola Andrea Niño-Suárez, Emmanuel Zenén Rivera-Blas, and Nayeli Rodríguez-Contreras. 2024. "e-Learning Challenges in STEM Education" Education Sciences 14, no. 12: 1370. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121370

APA Style

Saldívar-Almorejo, M. M., Flores-Herrera, L. A., Rivera-Blas, R., Niño-Suárez, P. A., Rivera-Blas, E. Z., & Rodríguez-Contreras, N. (2024). e-Learning Challenges in STEM Education. Education Sciences, 14(12), 1370. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121370

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop
  NODES
Association 2
coding 2
Community 2
Experiments 7
games 4
games 4
Idea 3
idea 3
innovation 6
Interesting 2
Intern 48
iOS 13
Javascript 2
languages 2
mac 26
multimedia 2
Note 9
OOP 3
os 194
server 2
text 14
Theorie 2
Training 21
twitter 1
visual 4
web 3