STEAM Implementation in Preschool and Primary School Education: Experiences from Six Countries

Abstract

This chapter presents a survey focusing on pre-primary and primary STEAM education in six countries. The survey sought to identify: (a) the perceptions of teachers, parents, and professionals from STEM and the Arts (hereafter STEAM professionals) about the STEAM approach; (b) teachers’ training needs; (c) teachers’, parents’, STEAM professionals’ perceptions of the value of the STEAM’s role in increasing the participation of young girls and disadvantaged students in STEM. Data was collected through focus-group interviews and were qualitatively analyzed. Results showed that teachers, STEAM professionals, and most of the parents had positive perceptions of the STEAM approach; they believed that it increases children’s motivation and engagement in learning, regardless of the child’s gender; it increases creativity, self-confidence and offers good learning opportunities for both boys and girls, taking into consideration their emotional and social abilities. The main difficulties identified were related to curriculum limitations, school infrastructure, and lack of resources, experience, and training in the STEAM approach. Teachers highlighted the need of training on the STEAM philosophy, essential concepts, and specific methods; access to STEAM-specific digital resources/software; practical training/seminars or blended learning training. Student teachers emphasized the need for more STEAM lessons in their initial training.

1. Introduction

Science in the postmodern era endorses the principles of democracy and justice, critical sustainability, and transformation for an equitable future [1]. On the same plane, Science education has evolved to (a) meet the needs of an increasingly diverse society [2], and (b) reorient learning by adopting the principles of “transdisciplinarity,” “political citizenship” and “philosophical values,” overall, implementing science education through “interdisciplinary sessions in science and humanities” ([3], p. 106).

It comes to no surprise that, in this perspective, curriculum developers sought to link Science with Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) [4], to construct “contextualized knowledge” ([5], p. 79, 89), that is, knowledge meaningful to the learners [1]. The so-called STEM approach was developed to promote learning linked to the authentic needs and the interdisciplinary developments of the modern world [6]. The STEAM approach is also believed to support the general social–emotional learning [SEL] and development of the child. Through collaborative and interdisciplinary tasks and projects that involve processes of inquiry and problem solving, children are provided with the opportunities to develop the core social and emotional competencies as named by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) [7, 8, 9, 10]. However, more research is needed on this, as studies provide an inconclusive picture of the link between STEM and SEL so far. A review by Garner and Gabitova [11] revealed that research has not yet shown if STEM needs to be infused with SEL elements and/or strategies to become a holistic approach or if SEL will be the typical result of a consistent STEM approach (see also Ref. [12]). In the meantime, a holistic approach that accommodates STEAM in meaningful interactions, real-world inquiries, and play is highly advisable [9]. Research revealed the benefits as well as the gaps and deficiencies of this approach, as learners in STEM still fell behind in creative skills and innovative thinking [13]. This led to the addition of Art to the STEM subjects (hence the abbreviation STEAM) and a new approach that was enhanced by humanities [3].

The STEAM approach continues to develop but is this an approach that can materialize a postmodern approach to education? Art was initially introduced to “promote curricular integration between science, technology, engineering, mathematics and the arts favoring deep and collaborative learning on students” ([14], p. 2), and to “promote creativity together with rationalization” ([15], p. 1). As such, the STEAM approach adheres to the principles of Western modernism, utilitarianism, and liberal education perspectives. However, Art can potentially move STEAM to a critical postmodern level.

What Art integration can contribute to STEM lies in “the epistemic practices in the arts” ([16], p. 24), which can be grouped into the following categories: Technical and critical practices, creative practices, and ethical practices ([16], p. 27). Technical and critical practices in Art include the close examination of matters and the deconstruction of parts to reveal the “meaning” behind the compilation of different construction elements [16]. Applying this process can help STEM to critically deconstruct major discourses and question theoretical frameworks and definitions. The creative practices include the integration and manipulation of “multiple sign systems,” multiple principles and ideas, as well as the artistic augmentation of meaning ([16], p. 27). The multiplicity imposed by the artistic creative processes can enhance the convergent thinking promoted by STEM with the divergent thinking promoted by Arts, and the communicative actions [17, 18] used for scientific negotiation. The ethical practices include negotiation and rigorous evaluation of the quality of a project [16]. Ethical practices are needed in STEM to ensure that projects “are of value to a larger community” ([16], p. 24) and strive for the betterment and sustainability of society [19].

Moreover, to move to a critical postmodern level, STEAM will have to address equity issues [1]. More specifically, the STEAM approach must address (a) the gender disparities and (b) the barriers disadvantaged students face in STEM education and STEM careers [2].

Recent reports stress that STEM professions are not attracting young ‘people’s interest and learners lack the appropriate skills to pursue STEM careers [20]. In Europe, STEM professions are among the “top five shortage occupations” ([21], p. 1). Research also identifies that there is a gender underrepresentation in STEM professionals. Girls and women are less likely to pursue STEM careers even if they are not lacking skills and knowledge in STEM subjects throughout their school life [22].

Research investigating the reasons behind this underrepresentation identified factors affecting girls’ and women’s choices at an individual and environmental level. At the individual level, research shows factors such as personal interest, self-confidence, or motivation [23]. At the environmental level, these factors include stereotypes about gender and STEM [23, 24], parental beliefs, dispositions, behavior [23, 24], the presence of suitable female role models, and/or the provision of mentoring [25, 26].

Other research shows how the same two main categories of factors influence the choice of a STEM major among disadvantaged students as well. More specifically, the studies identify the following factors:

1. Individual factors [27] such as the intention to pursue a STEM career [27] and the motivation to attend STEM high schools and STEM courses.

2. Environmental factors such as (a) students’ research experience [28]; (b) if the students had a mentor or a parent with a STEM career [24, 29, 30]; (c) the experience of supportive learning environments in the family or at school [30, 31]; (d) a sense of belonging at school [32, 33, 34]; and (e) the development of intellectual capacity for STEM [27].

Equity issues need to be tackled at an early stage as they appear at all education levels (pre-primary, primary, secondary, and postsecondary) [35].

The following pages present exploratory research on the perceptions and expectations of educational actors regarding STEAM education at the preschool and primary school levels.

2. Research methodology

2.1 The context of the research

The present chapter shows the results of a study carried out in six countries in the context of the “Next Generation Science Standards [NGSS] through STEAM” project, which was funded by the European Union (Erasmus+, Agreement No 2020-1-TR01-KA201-094463 2020). As a Key Action 201 “strategic partnership for school education,” the project involved countries such as Türkiye, Romania, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, and Lithuania. The project is coordinated by the Turkish National Agency (Centre for European Union Education and Youth Programs) and the Uskudar District National Education. NGSS is set to promote STEM and Arts (STEAM) in early childhood education through a novel approach that will focus on social and emotional learning (SEL), integrated with interactive approaches [e.g., drama, gamified learning, and physical education], involving social, emotional as well as cognitive skills. The ultimate goal will be to “enhance, encourage, and foster an innovative educational approach that integrates STEM and Arts learning in early childhood education through gender-inclusive methods and resources and promote a positive change of attitudes toward non-stereotyping choices in education” [from the NGSS funding application]. As such, the project addresses educational inequalities and targets the perceptions and expectations of educational actors regarding STEAM education at the preschool and primary school levels.

A needs analysis and curriculum analysis in each partner country had to be carried out to enable partner countries to establish common criteria for the estimation of the good practices within the project context and to offer background information for developing NGSS teaching resources for preschool and primary school teachers.

2.2 Research goals

The main objective of the needs analysis was to identify the opinions of the teachers, parents, and STEAM professionals on STEAM implementation (“good practices, difficulties, and strengths, effects”), with a particular reference to the “motivation and participation of girls and disadvantaged students in science education and careers.” ([36], p. 16, [37]). Also, the researchers intended to identify teachers’ “training needs” and “criteria of good practices from the teacher’s perspective.” Another research goal was to identify the “parents’ perceptions of gender differences in children’s play and/or school” and STEAM activities [idem].

2.3 Research methods and tools

Each partner organized and conducted a series of focus-group interviews targeting three types of stakeholders: (1) teachers (or student teachers) and management staff from preschools and primary schools, (2) parents, and (3) STEAM professionals. The interviews were structured following the list of topics displayed in Table 1.

Part A. General questions (for all participants):
Topics/issues addressed:
Teachers’ STEAM professionals’ and parents’ understanding of the difference between STEM and STEAM. The strategies teachers could use to motivate and engage the pupils in science lessons. The benefits schools could rip from collaboration with the international STEAM community.
Part B. Specific questions for each stakeholder group:
B.1 Topics/issues addressed to the teachers’ sample (for pre-primary, primary, and student teachers alike):
The experience and knowledge teachers had about the STEM/STEAM approach. The difficulties teachers and student teachers face/or could face in implementing the STEM/STEAM approach [difficulties related to infrastructure, logistics, the framework provided by the national curriculum, the design of the lesson plans, etc.]. Ways in which teachers can overcome these difficulties; aspects that can help the most or the least; and kinds of support teachers receive from policymakers or other stakeholders. Teachers’ expectations related to the implementation of STEAM. Teachers’ perceptions about the effects of STEAM teaching on children. Strategies that teachers could use to motivate and engage pupils for STEAM lessons. Teachers’ experience in engaging the girls and disadvantaged students in STEAM courses. Teachers’ expectations from school management to help to teach female students. Kinds of training, educational programs, materials, seminars, tools, and platforms that teachers would wish for when teaching STEM. How well-prepared teachers feel about planning STEM/STEAM lessons. Whether teachers feel that they need more training on STEAM, if they have taken any training courses, and what kind of support they need to become more efficient and motivate their pupils. If teachers take students’ SEL into account while teaching STEAM/or any science lessons, and if they plan special activities to motivate them.
B.2 Topics/issues addressed to STEM and Arts professionals:
Arts professionals were asked if they thought they were doing Science when creating Art. Science professionals were asked if they thought they were creating Art when they were doing Science. Both STEM and Arts professionals were asked about the methodology they use [when engaged in teaching] to make STEM/STEAM more attractive to girls and disadvantaged students. Both STEM and Arts professionals were asked if they would do something [or wished teachers to do this] to help girls and disadvantaged students become familiar with tools and other devices.
B.3 Topics/issues addressed to parents of mainstream and disadvantaged pupils asked about the following:
Behavioral differences they notice among their children of different genders or while they learn Science and in their emotional reaction to scientific topics. Differences they notice among their children of different gender in activities such as watching cartoons and playing with toys. Choices of educational toys they make for their children in terms of SEL. If they have ever talked to their children about the value of Science and Art and the topics the children were curious about.

Table 1.

Topics/issues addressed during the focus-group interviews [37].

The addressed topics were as follows: “subjects’ knowledge and awareness of the difference between STEM and STEAM”; “teachers’ difficulties (already experienced or anticipated) in implementing the STEAM approach”; “ways to overcome difficulties and obstacles”; “the type of support they had/or they believed should have received in implementing STEAM”; “STEAM education effects on children”; “types of motivational strategies teachers used/would like to use to ensure equity (that is strengthening girls’ and disadvantaged children’s participation) in STEAM lessons”; and “training needs.” The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and subjected to qualitative content analysis.

The focus-group interview sessions were held online [using platforms such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and BigBlueButton] or face to face, according to the specific SARS-CoV-2 epidemic situation of each country. The duration of the focus-group interviews was between 1 and 2 h. The research subjects expressed verbally or signed [in face-to-face matching sessions] their consent; the consent form was previously agreed on by all project partners. European and national research ethics guidelines were previously discussed and agreed upon in the projects’ transnational meeting, which prepared the focus-group implementation, and they were followed through all interviews [38]. In all interview meetings, the moderators presented themselves, briefed participants on the project, and asked the participants to say a few words about their professional status and work experience. The moderators also cultivated a good mood and trust, stressing that all opinions were valuable and would remain anonymous to obtain the sincerest answers [39, 40].

The focus-group interview contained two parts of questions. The first part included some general questions addressed to all groups of participants (pre-primary, primary and student teachers, STEAM professionals, and parents). The second part included questions geared to the three distinct groups of the sample separately, that is, the teachers (pre-primary, primary, or student teachers), the STEAM professionals, and the parents. Table 1 presents in more detail the topics/issues addressed by each part of the questions.

2.4 Study population and sample

The study population was identified according to two main aspects, which were essential for the NGSS project: (a) the participants’ occupational status in education and STEAM and (b) the parental status of children aged 4–11. The study population, therefore, involved three major categories of subjects: (i) pre-primary and primary school teachers (or student teachers) and educational management representatives, (ii) STEAM professionals, and (iii) parents of children aged 4–11 [36]. The study adopted purposeful sampling (also known as purposive sampling or intentional sampling), which is the sampling that uses the deliberate or intentional choice of the participants based on their qualities or characteristics that are important for the research [40, 41]. Also, for achieving the research goals, purposeful sampling offers the possibility to select subjects who are able and willing to provide needed information based on their experience and interest [40]. The specific, purposeful sampling technique used in this study was criterion sampling [42] since we need to comply with the project criteria for the target groups and obtain a comprehensive understanding of the issues from different educational stakeholders. Therefore, the sampling criteria were as follows: (i) the occupational status of the participants (in-service or student teachers and management staff from preschool and primary school education, STEAM professionals, and parents), (ii) the subjects’ willingness to participate, reflecting their interest in the STEAM subjects, and (iii) the minimum number for each study population category as specified by the NGSS project (12 preschool and primary school teachers, four female STEM professionals, three female professional artists, and six parents, three of which should have children of different gender). Thus, the samples were not statistically representative of the national state of the partner countries, and the results can only be indicative of the general situation. The residential areas of the subjects were both urban and rural, and some lived in geographically and economically disadvantaged environments. The average teaching experience of all teachers group was between 10 years (in Greece) and 25 years (in Lithuania). The recruitment was carried out via open calls and distributed by the partners’ communication channels.

The final numbers of the participants involved in the focus-group interviews are presented in Table 2.

Country	Teachers	STEM + Arts professionals	Parents	Total per country
Romania	19	9 [8 female]	9	37
Türkiye	19	14 [12 female]	13	46
Bulgaria	18	5 [all female]	7	30
Greece	41: 17 student teachers + 24 professional teachers	10 [8 female]	9	60
Lithuania	12	7 [4 female]	6	25
Poland	20	8 [7 female]	10	38
Total per group	129 teachers	53 professionals [44 female]	54 parents	236 participants

Table 2.

Totals of participants in the focus-group interviews.

2.5 Data analysis

For the data analysis, a deductive thematic approach was used to ensure unitary identification of the information targeted by the research questions, especially in the context of transnational research. Also, a deductive analysis helps maintain focus on the research purpose [42, 43]. This approach can be used when a researcher has a fair idea about the likely responses that will be received from the research subjects [42], and/or when the researcher is familiar with the research topic, or involved in the analyzed phenomenon [44]. In our case, the researchers already had the frames of reference/cognitions that helped them identify the meanings of the answers considering the purpose of the research. Given that all partner members involved in the focus-group interviews were familiar with STEAM in preschool and primary education and had the necessary information/cognitive frames for interview analysis, we considered this approach best suited for the data analysis of the focus-group interviews. The deductive approach to analyzing qualitative data is based on a structure predetermined by the researcher, which is also reflected in the design of the interview and the main topics covered by the interview questions [39, 43]. In our study, the main topics became the themes used in the data analysis. Before starting the interview content analysis, they were presented and agreed upon within a transnational meeting with all research partners. Also, a template was developed and agreed upon within this meeting to clear up code definitions and eliminate unnecessary codes [45]. This template led to a unitary identification of the codes in all nationally transcribed interviews, assuring intercoder reliability and maintaining alignment with the research questions. [46]. The researchers coded the transcribed interviews by matching the codes from the template with segments of data [verbal and nonverbal responses of the participants] selected as representative of each code [47].

2.6 Research results

The results we present below follow the themes emerging from the data analysis and cover the main topics of the interviews.

2.6.1 Teachers and STEM and arts professional’s previous experience and knowledge of the STEM/STEAM approach

Analysis revealed that most teachers and STEAM professionals from all the partner countries had a general idea about the STEAM approach. They knew the meaning of the STEM/STEAM acronym. Still, only a few had the experience of implementing it [mostly Lithuanian teachers and a few teachers from Türkiye, Greece, and Romania]. In general, they identified themselves as inexperienced or not prepared enough to teach the STEM or STEAM approaches. The Greek student teachers appeared to be more informed about the STEAM approach.

Except for Lithuanian primary teachers, who had some experience in teaching STEM/STEAM and were familiarized with specific methods, most of the teachers and STEAM professionals said they knew only a few of the particular didactic methods or strategies used in the context of the STEAM approach.

All the teachers, almost all STEM professionals, and most of the Arts professionals understood the need or the benefits of integrating Arts with Science and the ways to combine them. Most of the Arts professionals agreed that there can be Science through Arts and vice versa and could think of examples of how these domains can be correlated.

Overall, a slight difference was identified between teachers and STEM professionals regarding the knowledge of STEM philosophy and specificity. STEM professionals declared that they had greater access to up-to-date Science or Art education information.

The general attitude of preschool and primary school teachers and STEAM professionals toward the STEAM approach implementation was positive, highlighted by the openness and desire to know more and to try it in their educational endeavors.

2.6.2 Difficulties faced in implementing the STEAM approach

For most primary teachers and STEAM professionals that had previously experienced STEAM implementation or similar activities, the primary identified difficulties were as follows:

• The school’s infrastructure (space and schedules) made it difficult to allow the interdisciplinary approach to the topics, as most teachers and Science or Art professors could not collaborate or consult each other.

• There is a lack of teaching materials/resources (e.g., technology and materials needed for experiments) or specific STEM spaces in the community (such as laboratories, botanical gardens, and museums) that could sustain proper STEAM implementation and ensure the safety of the children, especially when conducting experiments.

• Most teachers believe they lack expertise in the STEAM approach.

• The design and preparation of the lessons are time-consuming and create an additional workload for teachers, mainly in disadvantaged schools.

• The curriculum frameworks imposed some limitations on integrated teaching of the topics (in the case of Romania, Türkiye, and Bulgaria), especially in the case of upper classes (the 3rd and 4th grades), by dividing the teaching of the core curriculum subjects.

• Support from or collaboration with experts/professionals/teachers from the Science field is absent.

• Supporting educational policies related to STEAM education (except for Lithuania and Greece) are also nonexistent.

The lack of resources and curriculum limitations for preschool teachers did not create difficulties but rather challenges. They declared that teaching resources for these ages are more accessible or affordable, and they usually get more involvement from parents; also, they admitted that curriculum frames are more open to a creative and customized approach to the needs of learners and subjects.

In addition, teachers that had not previously experienced STEAM implementation highlighted difficulties in adapting to the level and specific needs of all children, especially in very heterogeneous classes, and a lack of adequate information, models for STEAM teaching, and training in STEAM implementation.

2.6.3 The support teachers had and ways of overcoming the identified difficulties

The interviews revealed that the teachers overcame or could overcome the obstacles through (i) personal interest, (ii) personal study and effort to understand and learn more on how to implement STEAM lessons, (iii) collaboration with a more experienced teacher or mentor, or with other colleagues interested in this approach, and (iv) adapting some examples of STEAM activities available on the Internet. Other ways that teachers used to meet the demands of a STEAM approach included:

• Involving parents to obtain resources for the lessons [Türkiye and Romania].

• Obtaining resources/support or financial support from other organizations within the community [e.g., universities nearby and commercial institutions] in the case of Türkiye, Lithuania, and Romania.

• Support from school management for teaching resources and school infrastructure difficulties, and support from the academic field for the teaching design/strategies [in the case of Türkiye and Romania].

• Support from the policymakers, only in the case of teachers from Lithuania, where the schools have a team responsible for STEAM education, and the teachers have got governmental training on STEAM methodology.

2.6.4 Teachers’ training needs and readiness to implement STEAM education

The research revealed that most of the teachers did not feel quite ready to implement STEAM education, although they were willing and open to this type of approach. Only a few teachers from Lithuania and most teachers from Türkiye felt ready to implement STEAM activities.

Regarding the training needs, all teachers stated the need for more specialized training on STEAM, for a deeper understanding of the STEAM philosophy, ideas, methods, and the need for more teaching resources [preferably digital] such as lesson plans and educational materials. Also, the research highlighted the need for mentoring and sharing experiences between teachers, even transnational sharing, from the most experienced colleagues. Other training needs outlined by the interviews were as follows:

• The need to learn how to identify pupils’ learning needs and learning styles, especially in the case of intellectually challenged children, and how to link the lessons with real-life problems.

• The need for learning innovative methods, and methods suitable for working with vulnerable children, not only discriminated but also abused or emotionally disturbed.

• The need for learning how to improve their collaboration with parents, and to increase the awareness of the teachers being role models and influencers for the future career choices of their students.

• The university students emphasized the need for more STEAM lessons in their initial training programs.

The data analysis also outlined the training resources teachers prefer: digital, open-source materials [e.g., ready implement lesson plans, papers describing step-by-step the educational methodology, examples of STEAM projects for different ages, or nonformal/extracurricular education projects based on or including STEAM approach], digital platforms or Apps suitable for STEAM implementation [with free access to use it]. Regarding the format of the training, teachers identified preferences were as follows:

• Practical training/seminars, “on the field” or blended learning training.

• More international projects and activities where they could share their experience with teachers from other countries [in the case of Lithuania, Türkiye, and Romania].

• Fieldwork in nonformal education providers, such as museums, aquariums, and planetariums.

• A “learning hub”—a physical or virtual space for teachers to meet peers, stakeholders, and other experts in their field of interest.

2.6.5 Teachers’ opinion about the characteristics/attributes of a “good practice” in the STEAM education

The analysis of teachers’ and STEAM professionals’ answers revealed that teachers and STEAM professionals identify four dimensions of a “good practice” in STEAM education, which are as follows:

1. The engaging and motivational dimension: the activities should fully engage all children, regardless of their gender or disadvantages; should be attractive and should motivate children to learn; and should be inspirational and should increase children’s interest, especially girls’ interest and motivation for science education and work.

2. The implementation dimension: the activities should be easy to implement and should not require a great deal of time and many financial resources; also, the activities should include active tasks, hands-on experimentation, and teamwork.

3. The creativity dimension: the activities should accommodate creative, innovative, and engaging ways to do things, which could help children and teachers to think “out of the box” and should allow students to put their theoretical knowledge into practice in innovative ways, which could help the development of their mind, socio-emotional skills, and digital skills for both students and teachers.

4. The authenticity dimension: children must work and use authentic tools and instruments, not just toys, as this offers the possibility of obtaining meaningful artifacts that could be capitalized and promoted all over the country or the world.

2.6.6 Expected effects of STEAM teaching on children

The STEAM education value for children’s development, reflected in teachers’ and STEAM professionals` opinions, is comprised of four categories: cognitive development, socio-emotional development (including emotional skills, communication, and relationship skills with peers), learning motivation, and digital skills.

The value for cognitive development is derived from the increased quality of learning of the STEAM approach; in teachers’ and parents’ opinions, children find learning through STEAM easier, more pleasurable, and more active. Also, STEAM education helps children acquire scientific literacy and improve their critical thinking, inquiry, problem-solving skills, and creativity. In STEM and Arts professionals’ opinions, STEAM education can offer ways for extracurricular learning opportunities for all ages and educational levels.

In teachers’ and STEAM professionals’ opinions, the value regarding socio-emotional and communication abilities is because STEAM activities help children to improve self-image, obtain higher self-esteem, strengthen perceived self-efficacy, increase resilience, tolerance, and empathy, and improve teamwork skills and assertive communication skills.

The value regarding children’s intrinsic learning motivation and positive attitudes toward learning is derived from the fact that STEAM activities stimulate children’s cognitive motivation (as curiosity, eagerness to know more), learning autonomy, and engagement (students are much more committed, more involved, and more eager to learn).

The value regarding digital skills is because STEAM education implies working with digital devices, use of the Internet, computer programming, coding, etc.

2.6.7 Social and emotional learning (SEL) integrated in a STEAM lesson or science education

All teachers highlighted that SEL is essential in all types of lessons. Many said that socio-emotional abilities can be developed in Science or STEAM lessons. However, some of the teachers were not able to specify how STEAM can contribute to SEL or, the opposite, how SEL can primarily contribute to successful STEAM lessons.

2.6.8 STEAM’s role in increasing the motivation and participation of young girls in STEM fields of study and careers

Most of the participants from the groups of STEM and Arts professionals said they did not encounter gender discrimination or gender differences in Science or Arts classes, mainly referring to girls’ involvement and motivation to learn and participate in activities. Teachers and STEM professionals stated that students display different psychological features such as temperament and attitude during learning, but their involvement in learning activities is not influenced by gender. All the teachers and some STEM professionals admitted that in their past experiences (as teachers or as students), they encountered some adult bias toward female participation in studying and working in Science fields. For example, teachers from Romania declared that some older teachers did not usually involve girls in doing experiments and/or solving Physics/Chemistry problems. In their present-day experience, teachers do not differentiate methods or tools for girls with the purpose of increasing their interest and involvement in the activity since girls’ and boys’ interest in Science does not depend on their gender.

Also, some schools in Türkiye still have to deal with girls’ school dropouts due to early marriages or because of their parents’ perceptions about the female role. They stated, therefore, that the parents should be educated and trained about gender equality starting from the early ages, because without parents’ support, it is very difficult to keep girls in school. They also proposed strategies and solutions for the motivation and participation of girls and disadvantaged students: supporting collaboration among all students, using appropriate role models, and teaching according to the needs and interests of the girls and disadvantaged children.

2.6.9 Ways teachers and STEAM professionals make STEM/STEAM more attractive to girls and disadvantaged children

In teachers’ opinion, children from economically disadvantaged families must deal with educational inequalities because they do not have material resources for all the learning tasks and activities. These children need to be financially and educationally supported. Also, the children from geographically disadvantaged groups need support from mobile teams of STEAM professionals and teachers or summer schools and extracurricular activities such as theater. These can be developed and offered in their settlements to help children learn different topics (from Sciences and even Humanities) through Arts. All the teachers and STEM and Arts professionals argued that STEAM activities would add greater value to children’s education in these disadvantaged areas. All the teachers and STEAM professionals believed that the STEAM approach makes a difference and is an opportunity for all children to develop and deepen their knowledge and better prepare for their future professions. In respondents’ opinions, the ways of increasing lessons’ attractiveness to all the children are assuring what they defined as a “good practice” in teaching STEAM: easy, pleasurable, and interactive activities that fully engage all the children; lessons that allow peer coaching, and teamwork; and extracurricular activities (e.g., visits to museums and botanical gardens and outdoor workshops).

2.6.10 Parents’ perception of gender differences

Almost all parents claimed that they had no problem allowing children of either gender to play or engage in all types of games and activities. However, some parents acknowledged some differences between girls and boys in playing with toys or in their choice of activities, depending on children’s age. Some Bulgarian parents thought boys are mostly computer gamers and more active (they prefer balls, Lego, and cartoon characters), while girls are assigned to “calm” playing, such as mind and board games. In their opinion, this could be explained by stereotypical behavior children observe and parochial ideas that might be passed on to them through their environment, from older people, or even from younger ones.

2.6.11 Parents’ perceptions of the value of science and art in children’s education

Most parents (except those from Lithuania, where STEAM education is a popular topic) declared that they did not know much about the STEAM approach until they participated in the focus-group interviews, so they could not take a stand on the value of this approach for their child’s development and education. Still, most stated that Art helps their children express themselves better and natural sciences are useful for the future career of their children. Discussion during the interview enabled parents to understand what STEAM is and how children will benefit from it. So, they assumed that through STEAM, children could learn by playing, acting, and doing experiments. They also thought that this approach helps children to learn quickly and more effortlessly. Finally, all the parents identified the potential of the STEAM approach for creating opportunities to discover a child’s special talents and abilities.

3. Discussion

The research results highlighted that, from a general perspective, teachers from preschool and primary school education, professionals in STEM and Arts fields, and even many parents are aware of the existence of STEAM education and have a minimum understanding of its philosophy. This offers a positive base for further development of educational policies of STEAM education since the need for contextualized knowledge, and interdisciplinary teaching is increasingly emphasized at a global level [5, 6, 48].

The research revealed differences between the teachers from the six partner countries in implementing STEAM in their classrooms. This difference is explained by the curriculum and school infrastructure limitations, lack of educational policies supporting STEAM implementation, and lack of adequate resources. Besides these difficulties, the lack of specific training and poor expertise in STEAM education were the main issues affecting its proper implementation in all six investigated countries. Good expertise for STEAM implementation is all the more important in the postmodern world when debating on social justice, sustainable development and an equitable future [1], and on “the reification of traditional gender roles in STEM and the influence of neoliberal ideology in STEM context” ([49], p. 1).

An encouraging similarity between the six countries is the identified training needs of teachers from both education levels—preschool and primary school—and identified ways of overcoming difficulties related to the lack of STEAM expertise. These show teachers’ readiness for self-reflection, openness to professional growth, and the desire to improve themselves and the quality of their practice. This aspect is all the more important as teachers often feel threatened; their self-efficacy in STEAM implementation is often weakened as a result of lack of training, planning time, and material resources, in the context of a new emphasis on STEAM education in an “increasingly complex world” ([50], p. 1). The interest of Greek student teachers in STEAM education courses, modules, and seminars included in their initial training programs also reveal their awareness of the importance of training for their future STEAM practice and success [51]. The preferred training modalities and training resources teachers identified in all six countries were also common. They outline a familiar requirement of today’s training: that we live and learn in a digital world that requires digital literacy [52].

Besides curriculum limitations and poor expertise for STEAM implementation, other difficulties reported in all six countries are the lack of infrastructure and proper educational materials. STEAM education requires schools to have a series of bespoke platforms, tools, pedagogical material, and a sizeable budget [53]. Primary school and preschool teachers in Türkiye and Romania suggested overcoming these difficulties, with parents’ help, and this brings up the question for the potential of school-family partnerships as a formal support strategy for STEAM implementation at all education levels in all countries. It is worth considering that parents play an essential role in constructing children’s professional aspirations and influencing their professional orientation [54, 55]. Also, the results highlighted the issue of school partnerships with local or national institutions as being a key action for overcoming the difficulties related to the lack of proper teaching resources or the lack of STEM training, both in primary and preschool education [56, 57]. School collaboration with other educational institutions or economic organizations for the sake of successful STEAM implementation should also be on policymakers’ agenda. In our study, only Lithuanian teachers reported support from policymakers or other similar stakeholders.

A positive aspect of teachers’ perception, stemming from our results, is that teachers and STEAM professionals recognize the added value of integrating Arts within STEM in a formal education context. An obvious consequence is the awareness that an improved STEAM approach provides a framework for holistic childhood development through combining art, humanities, and design with specific science topics and methods [57]. Especially in early childhood education, when learners are developing their expressive language skills, it is relevant to use different media, such as artistic tools and techniques, to enable them to express their ideas and feelings [58]. At the same time, creative expression lays bare the fact that there will not always be one unique, correct answer. The tinkering part of arts is also important in future STEM learning. It provides a channel to express creativity and offers an opportunity to learn about taking mitigated risks when exploring novel ways to address specific challenges [59]. A series of visual arts lend themselves perfectly well to these activities, such as esthetics, visual literacy, and creative communication. Furthermore, they facilitate the learning of scientific concepts, the development of specific technical skills, and the ability to engage in interdisciplinary learning activities [60]. Also, exploration of pathways in which Αrts enable STEM to address equity or epistemological shifts (i.e., to employ critical and ethical practices and perspectives) is highly needed [61, 62, 63] for a sustainable future [64].

A significant similarity between country data in our study is the meaning teachers attribute to a “good practice.” This similarity is a positive aspect, reflecting a deep and widespread understanding of the means and value of STEAM education for children’s development from early stages [51, 65]. However, these good practices require teachers to have good STEAM subject knowledge and skills to apply appropriate methods and identify the right competencies their students need to develop. Teachers need continuous training to acquire enough subject/topic knowledge to better understand what they want to teach, and pedagogical content and curricular expertise so that they can understand how to teach STEAM and assess the subsequent learning [66].

Another common perception held by teachers in all, six countries, refers to the value of STEAM implementation for children’s development: STEAM education is perceived to promote creativity, collaborative and experiential learning, as well as resilience and problem-solving skills. These are crucial skills for tomorrow’s political leaders, scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and teachers [16, 67]. In addition to this, it has been shown both by this study and literature review [65, 67, 68] that STEAM can offer ways for extracurricular learning opportunities for all ages and educational levels. STEAM is a new way to promote students’ creativity, collaboration, and collective being through transdisciplinary consciousness and conscience [48, 67, 69]. The fact that STEM/STEAM initiatives are deployed globally shows a definite push toward a more interdisciplinary pedagogy, redefining the purpose of education [70]. In some countries, experiments on interdisciplinary strategies for college and high school teachers show that high school and college students use of STEAM technologies while studying physical and mathematical disciplines improves performance, reduces vulnerability, improves self-esteem, and expands their knowledge [71].

Although many teachers stated that social–emotional development is essential in STEAM teaching, they could not fully explain how STEAM education could contribute to the social–emotional development of school children. They also tended to offer a narrow definition of social–emotional skills, referring to empathy, cooperation, self-esteem, and assertiveness. This shows they could not identify and link STEAM to important SEL aspects such as self-control, self-confidence, self-awareness, and decision-making skills. STEAM competencies should be based on cognitive, as well as on social and emotional skills, to form active, critical, and informed citizens of our societies. A survey of the World Economic Forum predicted that the following skills are crucial in the current job market: problem-solving, critical thinking, creativity, people management, emotional intelligence, service orientation, assessment and decision making, negotiations, and cognitive flexibility [65, 67].

It is noteworthy that the views of teachers and STEAM female professionals are similar on the issue of involving girls in STEAM education and increasing their interest in the field of Science. Their references emphasize the awareness of gender equality in education and nondiscriminatory treatment in the teaching of Sciences and Arts. Still, the results also revealed that some prejudices about girls and STEM might prevail, such as their purported lack of interest and enthusiasm in Science and that girls are generally less skilled and, therefore, less successful in technological challenges. These prejudices can become a self-fulfilling prophecy: boys can become more and girls less self-confident in STEM, driven by the self-perception of their competence and skills [72]. This phenomenon again highlights that families significantly impact the hopes and professional aspirations of children. In terms of negative impact, this is certainly more the case for girls since they tend to avoid activities that are intended for “really smart” children only ([73], p. 389). Türkiye’s focus group results showed that there are still schools struggling with girls’ school dropout problems due to early marriage or family pressure. Therefore, in the last years, the government and other organizations have carried out many projects in Türkiye for the elimination of STEM and social gender-based inequalities through approaches that support collaboration among students, use appropriate role models, etc. [74]. The apparent intention is to influence children’s interests positively and help them find their path in the world, remaining resilient toward gender-based prejudice. However, intentions need to find a practical deployment, and there is still a pronounced need to organize more joint-up activities, such as involving children, parents, and the broader STEM community, including businesses and academia [55, 56, 64]. This will allow parents and children alike to discover the excitement and the practical implementations of STEAM learning [75].

Finally, data in five countries (except Lithuania) show that parents do not have much awareness about the importance of STEAM education. Parental awareness should also become the focus for government and other policymakers. All the more since the influence of parents on children’s choice of STEM disciplines and on learning results has been highlighted by several studies [54, 55].

4. Conclusions

Considering the STEAM approach to be an innovative pedagogical approach in preschool and primary school education in the postmodern era, exploring stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations offers valuable insights to educational policymakers. Our research highlighted similarities and differences between the six countries involved in the NGSS project. We compared data about teachers’ perceptions of the benefits and obstacles in the implementation of the STEAM approach and their training needs; we also compared data focusing on teachers’, STEM and Arts professionals’ and parents’ perceptions of the value of the STEAM approach, and the role of STEAM in increasing the participation of young girls and disadvantaged students in STEM.

The results have shown the challenges teachers from six European countries face in their efforts to deploy a STEM and/or a STEAM approach in the classroom; this included both actual challenges they had come across and potential issues they thought may impact teachers’ work. Resources, training provisions, and support structures for teachers were identified as the building blocks of a rigorous, supportive environment for STEAM. The educational stakeholders (teachers, STEAM professionals, and parents) in most cases, did not have enough information (except the teachers from Lithuania and prospective teachers from Greece) or adequate tools and materials, or even adequate curriculum frames (except Greece) to properly implement the STEAM approach. Also, teachers and parents did not have a clear and deeper understanding of the potential benefits of the STEAM approach for children’s development. But, a very positive aspect was that all teachers and STEAM professionals were enthusiastic about the approach and eager to learn more about STEAM education.

The perception of most interview subjects regarding gender discrimination was that there was no gender discrimination in the daily teaching activities or girls’ access to general or Science education (except for Türkiye), at least to a declarative level. Still, there are raising questions that need to be answered about other factors or mechanisms involved in the determination of lower levels of female representation and participation in Science fields.

Society at large can draw benefits from well-run STEAM programs, in that they will not only raise the awareness of the importance of STEM among the public, but they can also equip society with the necessary resources, guidance, and mentorship structures [67, 76]. Beyond the arguments of international studies on the benefits of the STEAM approach in preschool and primary education, this study also highlighted teachers’ understanding of these benefits, and especially their availability to overcome possible obstacles to implementation, including their desire for involvement in training for the STEAM approach.

Most importantly, this study offers a solid background for the next steps in developing good training programs, educational materials, and educational policy for implementing STEAM education at preschool and primary school levels.

This study has limitations, as the sample was not representative of each country. Thus, the results cannot offer a “state-of-the-art” picture of the STEAM approach implementation in the partner countries’ preschool and primary school education. This objective would require complementary research, with larger samples from different groups of stakeholders (professional teachers, student teachers, parents, STEM professionals, artists, school managers, policymakers, etc.). However, the study brings up issues identified by international research in the field and shows that the six partner countries face similar problems with each other and the rest of the world.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their appreciation to the project partners for their involvement in the accomplishment of the focus-group interviews. The authors would like to express acknowledgment and thanks to the European Commission, for funding the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through the STEAM project [Agreement No. 2020-1-TR01-KA201-094463 2020 Erasmus+, Key Action 201, Strategic Partnerships for school education].

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.