The Development and Challenges of STEM Education Research in China: A Content Analysis Based on CNKI-CSSCI Journals (2011-2024)

Yu-Shen Fang

doi:10.59400/fes3724

The Development and Challenges of STEM Education Research in China: A Content Analysis Based on CNKI-CSSCI Journals (2011-2024)

Yu-Shen Fang
College of Economics and Management, Zhaoqing University, Zhaoqing 526061, China

Article ID: 3724

Keywords: content analysis, industry-education integration, policy-driven, STEM education, structural challenges, talent cultivation

Abstract

In the context of the innovation-driven development strategy, STEM education has become a key initiative in China for cultivating innovative talent and enhancing national competitiveness. However, it remains to be seen whether academic research can effectively guide practice alongside the vigorous promotion at the policy level. This study employs content analysis to examine 41 CSSCI source journal articles included in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from 2011 to 2024, aiming to depict the current state of STEM education research in China and to explore its challenges. The study finds that STEM education research in China exhibits a distinct policy-driven characteristic, with its development trajectory highly synchronized with national policy cycles, but it lacks intrinsic motivation. In terms of research themes, there is a flourishing of "theoretical construction" accompanied by a scarcity of "empirical validation," highlighting a "knowing-doing gap." Spatially, research resources are highly concentrated in developed regions such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Wuhan, notably within normal universities. Educationally, the focus of research skews toward basic education, resulting in the neglect of higher education and vocational training stages that are directly related to industry needs, leading to a disconnection in the talent cultivation chain. Furthermore, the research subject is singular, with key stakeholders such as enterprises being absent, resulting in insufficient top-level design and mechanism research on the collaborative ecosystem of industry, academia, and research.

Published

2026-01-16

How to Cite

Fang, Y.-S. (2026). The Development and Challenges of STEM Education Research in China: A Content Analysis Based on CNKI-CSSCI Journals (2011-2024). Forum for Education Studies, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.59400/fes3724

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): In Progress

Section

Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

[1]U.S. National Science Foundation. Shaping the Future: Strategies for Revitalizing Undergraduate Education. U.S. National Science Foundation; 1996. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED433873

[2]Deehan J, Danaia L, Redshaw S, et al. STEM in the classroom: a scoping review of emerging research on the integration of STEM education within Australian schools. The Australian Educational Researcher. 2024; 51(5): 1–24. doi: 10.1007/s13384-024-00691-7

[3]Kennedy TJ, Odell MRL. Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International. 2014; 25(3): 246–258. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1044508.pdf

[4]Zourmpakis AI, Kalogiannakis M, Papadakis S. The Effects of Adaptive Gamification in Science Learning: A Comparison Between Traditional Inquiry-Based Learning and Gender Differences. Computers. 2024; 13(12): 324. doi: 10.3390/computers13120324

[5]Uğraş H, Uğraş M, Papadakis S, et al. ChatGPT-Supported Education in Primary Schools: The Potential of ChatGPT for Sustainable Practices. Sustainability. 2024; 16(22): 9855. doi: 10.3390/su16229855

[6]Louka K, Papadakis S. Enhancing computational thinking in early childhood education through ScratchJr integration. Heliyon. 2024; 10(10): e30482. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30482

[7]National Institute of Education Sciences. China STEM Education White Paper. National Institute of Education Sciences; 2017. Available online: https://ictdedu.cn/uploadfile/2018/0507/20180507033914363.pdf (in Chinese)

[8]National Data Bureau of China. Digital China Development Report (2023). National Data Bureau of China; 2024. Available online: https://www.nda.gov.cn/sjj/zhuanti/sjzgzxd/szzgbg/0605/ff808081-96b466bd-0197-3e30d491-065a.pdf (in Chinese)

[9]Chen CS. Observe The Practice of Technology Education in The Four Countries and Explore Taiwan’s Use of STEM as a Teaching Strategy for Technology Education Refer to the United States, Singapore, Finland, and Germany. Journal of Comparative Education. 2021; 90(90): 39–76. doi: 10.53106/160957582021050090002 (in Chinese)

[10]Fang YS. Developing tendency of STEM research topics and knowledge mapping analysis in 20 years. Forum on Science and Technology in China. 2019; (8): 161–169. (in Chinese)

[11]Vygotsky LS. Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press; 1980. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4

[12]Lave J, Wenger E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, 1st ed. Cambridge University Press; 1991. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511815355

[13]Banks F, Barlex D. Teaching STEM in the Secondary School: Helping Teachers Meet the Challenge, 2nd ed. Routledge; 2020. doi: 10.4324/9780429317736

[14]Marginson S, Tytler R, Freeman B, et al. STEM: Country Comparisons: International Comparisons of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education, Final Report. Australian Council of Learned Academies; 2013. Available online: https://scispace.com/pdf/stem-country-comparisons-international-comparisons-of-1bk7c9pemd.pdf

[15]National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine. Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. The National Academies Press; 2007. Available online: https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/11463/chapter/1

[16]U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement. STEM 2026: A Vision for Innovation in STEM Education. U.S. Department of Education; 2026. Available online: https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2016/09/AIR-STEM2026_Report_2016.pdf

[17]Tene T, Marcatoma Tixi JA, Palacios Robalino MDL, et al. Integrating immersive technologies with STEM education: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education. 2024; 9: 1410163. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1410163

[18]National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Board on Science Education, et al. Equity in K-12 Stem Education: Framing Decisions for the Future. National Academies Press; 2024. Available online: https://www.nationalacademies.org/projects/DBASSE-BOSE-18-03

[19]Bacovic M, Andrijasevic Z, Pejovic B. STEM Education and Growth in Europe. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 2022; 13(3): 2348–2371. doi: 10.1007/s13132-021-00817-7

[20]Spyropoulou N, Ioannou M, Kameas A. Impact Framework for Transforming STEAM Education: A Multi-Level Approach to Evidence-Based Reform. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(11): 1552. doi: 10.3390/educsci15111552

[21]Fairhurst N, Sheffield R, Koul R. Experiences of women in STEM: Personal narratives illustrating the fluidity and nuances of the STEM pipeline. Issues in Educational Research. 2024; 34(3): 974–994. Available online: http://www.iier.org.au/iier34/fairhurst.pdf

[22]BETTER in STEM (NSF #2111613). Available online: https://smate.wwu.edu/better-stem-nsf-2111613 (accessed on 15 October 2025).

[23]Change strategies and tools to support STEM faculty’s enactment of equitable, student-centered instruction. Available online: https://aaas-iuse.org/change-strategies-and-tools-to-support-stem-facultys-enactment-of-equitable-student-centered-instruction/ (accessed on 15 October 2025).

[24]About ASSIST. Available online: https://asta.edu.au/scienceassist/about-assist/ (accessed on 15 October 2025).

[25]Teacher Professional Lifecycle Framework. Available online: https://asta.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Teacher-Professional-Lifecycle-Framework-1.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2025).

[26]Adah Miller E, Berland L, Campbell T. Equity for Students Requires Equity for Teachers: The Inextricable Link between Teacher Professionalization and Equity-Centered Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education. 2024; 35(1): 24–43. doi: 10.1080/1046560X.2023.2170793

[27]Dong Y, Wu N, Xia LL. STEM teacher development and new quality improvement from the organizational and manpower perspectives. Journal of Guangxi Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition); 2024. 60(5): 66–75. (in Chinese)

[28]Luttgen K, Huang K, Chow E, et al. Learning by Making: Impact Study Report. Institute of Education Sciences; 2024. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Increased+student+achievement+through+parental+involvement+and+i&ff1=souGrantee+Submission&id=ED658409

[29]El-Hamamsy L, Bruno B, Audrin C, et al. How are primary school computer science curricular reforms contributing to equity? Impact on student learning, perception of the discipline, and gender gaps. International Journal of STEM Education. 2023; 10(1): 60. doi: 10.1186/s40594-023-00438-3

[30]Notice on issuing the 13th Five-Year Plan for educational informatization. Available online: https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2016/content_5133005.htm (accessed on 15 October 2025). (in Chinese)

[31]Yan X, Yu T, Chen Y. Global Comparison of STEM Education. In: Education in China and the World. Springer; 2024. pp. 389–443. doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-5861-0_9

[32]Liao C, Tse AWC. Exploring Teachers’ Perceived Competence in STEM Education in a National Pilot Middle School of STEM Education in Mainland China. International Journal of Learning and Teaching. 2024; 10(3). doi: 10.18178/ijlt.10.3.331-335

[33]Rumjaun A, Atchia MCS, Bholah R, et al. Broadening Perspectives of STEM education: A new Conceptual Framework. Journal of Research in STEM Education. 2024; 10(1–2): 60–88. doi: 10.51355/j-stem.2024.170

[34]Yu X, Yang Z. STEM Education in China: A Five Years Review Report. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies. 2022; 1–11. doi: 10.9734/ajess/2022/v32i130758

[35]Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 4th ed. Sage Publications; 2018.

[36]Stemler SE. Content Analysis. In: Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Wiley; 2015. pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0053

[37]Pfeffer J, Salancik GR. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper & Row; 1978.

[38]Zhang Y, Li X, Huang J, et al. The impact of a design-based integrated STEM teaching on students’ interdisciplinary attitude. China Educational Technology. 2018; (7): 81–89. (in Chinese)

[39]Xie L, Li CM. The study of curriculum reform based on integrated STEM education. Curriculum, Teaching Material and Method. 2017; 37(6): 63–68. (in Chinese)

[40]Cash P, Daalhuizen J, Hekkert P. Evaluating the efficacy and effectiveness of design methods: A systematic review and assessment framework. Design Studies. 2023; 88: 101204. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2023.101204

Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Surapati Pramanik

Nandalal Ghosh B.T. College, India

eISSN

3029-2956

Publication Frequency

Quarterly

Indexing

Polish Scientific Bibliography

About the Publisher

Academic Publishing insists on taking academic exchange and publication as the main line, carrying out comprehensive management based on science and technology, and fully exploring excellent international publishing resources. Within 5 years, it will form a strategic framework and scale with science (S), technology (T), medicine (M), education (E), and humanities and arts (H) as the main publishing fields. Academic Publishing is headquartered in Singapore and based in Malaysia, with the United States and China providing the main scientific and academic resources. At the same time, it has established long-term good cooperative relations with other publishing companies, scientific research communities, and academic organizations in more than a dozen countries and regions. Academic Publishing uses English and Chinese as its main publishing languages, mainly publishing books, journals, and conference papers in print and online. The vast majority of publications follow the international open access policy, providing stable and long-term quality and professional publications. With the joint efforts of the expert team and our professional editorial team, our publications will gradually be indexed by international databases in stages to provide convenient and professional retrieval for various scholars. At the same time, manuscripts we accept will be subject to the peer review principle, and cutting-edge and innovative research articles will be preferentially accepted for peer reference and discussion. All kinds of our publications are welcome for peer to contribute, access, and download.

more

Volume Arrangement

2025

2024

2023

Featured Articles

Diachronic analysis of Spanish scientific production on teaching methodologies in Primary Education: A scientometric and conceptual perspective (2000–2023)

The evaluation of science is essential to ensuring the quality, validity, and reliability of scientific results. Science needs to undergo a review process to ensure the rigorousness of scientific output. This evaluation provides a solid basis for political and economic decisions related to the design and execution of research projects, the establishment of new lines of research, or the identification of areas of specialization. This paper analyses diachronically the Spanish scientific production related to the implementation and development of teaching methodologies in primary education and indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases during the period 2000–2023. This analysis is carried out on the one hand, from a scientometric perspective, based on the analysis of indicators such as diachronic production, the journals with the highest scientific productivity, and the most productive institutions, and, on the other hand, from a conceptual perspective, trying to define its relationship with other areas of education. The general results of this study reveal two clear stages: the first, up to 2010, with little scientific production; and the second, from 2011 onwards, characterised by a general growth. The relationship between this field and others such as initial teacher training, ICT, and didactics is also evident.

The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools

This study explores the intricate relationship between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools in the Mansehra district of Pakistan. Teacher self-efficacy, defined as the belief in one’s ability to manage and influence classroom environments effectively, has been identified as a critical factor influencing both teaching performance and student outcomes. The research employed a mixed-method approach, gathering data from 62 teachers and 310 students using both online surveys (via Google Forms) and physical questionnaires to ensure a diverse and inclusive participant pool. Data analysis was conducted using two complementary tools: SPSS and Smart PLS. SPSS was used for descriptive statistics and inferential analyses, such as t-tests, chi-square tests, and measures of central tendency, to offer an overview of group differences and relationships between variables. Meanwhile, Smart PLS was employed for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), a technique suited for complex models and smaller sample sizes. This method allowed for the analysis of both direct and indirect relationships between the study variables—teacher self-efficacy, teaching practices, and classroom management. The findings reveal a significant positive correlation between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices. Additionally, teaching practices were found to mediate this relationship, indicating that higher levels of self-efficacy not only directly improve classroom management but also enhance teaching performance, which in turn contributes to better-managed classrooms. These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing teacher self-efficacy can have far-reaching effects on educational outcomes. The study highlights the need for focused teacher development programs that foster self-efficacy, thereby improving classroom management, student engagement, and overall academic success.

Artificial Intelligence in education: A comprehensive study

This comprehensive study delves into the multifaceted role of AI in education, exploring its applications, benefits, challenges, and future implications. The purpose of the study is to show how AI in education helps educators identify gaps in student knowledge and provide targeted feedback to improve learning outcomes. As a methodology, the library method and the study and review of various documents have been used in this research. The study examines the diverse range of AI technologies employed in educational settings, including intelligent tutoring systems, personalized learning platforms, educational chatbots, and virtual reality simulations. Furthermore, the study delves into the numerous benefits that AI brings to education. It highlights how AI-powered analytics and data-driven insights enable educators to gain deeper insights into student learning patterns, identify areas for improvement, and tailor instructional strategies accordingly. Additionally, AI-driven tools promote inclusivity by providing personalized support to learners with diverse needs and learning styles. Despite its transformative potential, the study also acknowledges the challenges and ethical considerations associated with integrating AI into education. Data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the digital divide are examined in detail, emphasizing the importance of responsible AI deployment and ethical guidelines. Looking ahead, the study explores the future implications of AI in education and the evolving role of educators in AI-enabled classrooms. It discusses how AI technologies will continue to evolve, offering new opportunities for collaborative learning, skill development, and lifelong education. In conclusion, this comprehensive study underscores the profound impact of AI on education and the need for thoughtful implementation strategies that prioritize equity, inclusivity, and ethical considerations. By harnessing the potential of AI, education systems can better prepare learners for the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Enhancing adult learner success in higher education through decision tree models: A machine learning approach

This article explores the use of machine learning, specifically Classification and Regression Trees (CART), to address the unique challenges faced by adult learners in higher education. These learners confront socio-cultural, economic, and institutional hurdles, such as stereotypes, financial constraints, and systemic inefficiencies. The study utilizes decision tree models to evaluate their effectiveness in predicting graduation outcomes, which helps in formulating tailored educational strategies. The research analyzed a comprehensive dataset spanning the academic years 2013–2014 to 2021–2022, evaluating the predictive accuracy of CART models using precision, recall, and F1 score. Findings indicate that attendance, age, and Pell Grant eligibility are key predictors of academic success, demonstrating the strong capability of the model across various educational metrics. This highlights the potential of machine learning (ML) to improve data-driven decision-making in educational settings. The results affirm the effectiveness of Decision Tree (DT) models in meeting the educational needs of adult learners and underscore the need for institutions to adapt their strategies to provide more inclusive and supportive environments. This study advocates for a shift towards nuanced, data-driven approaches in higher education, emphasizing the development of strategies that address the distinct challenges of adult learners, aiming to enhance inclusivity and support within the sector.