A STEM Model to Engage Students in Sustainable Science Education through Sports: A Case Study in Qatar
1.1. Relevant Literature Background
Role of Self-Motivation and Motivational Factors
1.2. Conceptual Framework
1.3. Research Objectives
- Did the student understand the importance of STEM by experiencing science through sports product engineering?
- Will the student consider a STEM-driven career resultantly in the future?
- Were the students able to understand and correlate scientific principles to the applications in daily life?
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants and the Educational Context
2.2.1. Workshop 1
- Activity 1: Comparing different kinds of cement—The workshop started with an ice-breaking experiment, wherein the students studied the different types of cement, one of the key ingredients in the concrete composite. They explored their hardening rates by measuring in different weights and analyzing the consequent results. They plotted graphs and interpreted them, thereby understanding the necessary science behind the process;
- Activity 2: Hunting for concrete objects—They researched different concrete applications, thereby increasing students’ awareness of the most common infrastructure material. This activity was crucial in enhancing students’ inquiry and research skills as they observe, question, learn, and deduce reasons behind using concrete materials;
- Activity 3: Comparing different concrete formulations—They familiarized themselves with the different ratios of ingredients/aggregates, i.e., sand, gravel, and cement, by experimenting with them to understand the properties of concrete, mainly density, hardness, and strength, according to the difference in ratios. They compared cement with concrete blocks and studied the packing of different aggregates to understand how each aggregate ratio affects concrete density;
- Activity 4: Reinforcing and testing concrete—The students grasped the effect of reinforcing materials on concrete properties, understanding their effect on strength and hardness. Moreover, they also tested the reinforced concrete blocks and compared them with non-reinforced concrete using strength-test apparatus, confirming the superior quality over the other.
- Bowling ball—The group of students who chose to design a bowling ball considered certain conditions (refer to Table 2) to meet parameters such as surface smoothness, the ball’s weight, and the distance traveled by it when rolled on a solid surface. The evaluators observed balls’ surface smoothness by touching the balls and comparing them between that of each group to score the maximum. The entire construction of the bowling ball was wholly administered and carried out by the participants based on their judgment. They chose spherical mold and prepared concrete mixtures as per their choice of shape and ingredient proportions, although the facilitator pronounced the optimum ratio. They also performed casting, i.e., filled the molds with the fresh concrete mixtures and left them to dry for 1–2 weeks. Based on their judgment, they removed molds to carry out the curing process. The curing process is by which the concrete samples are hydrated to improve their strength. The students were solely responsible for deciding the curing time for concrete structures, which is an essential step in the construction because it affects the strength of the product. The students were also provided permission to smoothen the surface using any external tools such as a metal file rather than depending on the mold’s texture, which naturally gives a smooth surface. This whole process was repeated if the end product broke or failed in meeting the diameter due to shrinkage. The ball was also dropped from a height multiple times to test its strength or success of the product. Once the ball met the required smoothness and weight, the test bowling ball was assessed by rolling through a V-shaped ramp to strike the bowling pins set across the lane. The wooden ramp was 1220 mm long and raised 400 mm on one end to achieve a reasonable ball speed (refer to Figure 2a). The ball had to “strike” between two edges spaced 600 mm apart at the end of the 3000 mm long lane. The test product, positioned at the top of a V-shaped ramp with no dust, was propelled down by gravity’s force at room temperature onto a flat-surfaced lane. The ramp was made from two rectangular slabs of plywood, 440 mm wide, placed at an angle of 40 degrees from the flat surface (refer to Figure 2a). The product ball was rolled in two orientations as arbitrarily marked “mostly perpendicular” on the ball. For each orientation, the ball was tried twice to pass through the strike zone successfully;
- Concrete boat—The design product alternative to the student’s choice of “concrete bowling ball” was the concrete boat. The concrete boat was expected to meet certain assessment conditions (refer to Table 2) in parameters such as buoyancy, load-carrying capacity, and float time. Similar to the bowling ball design, the participants either made a mold out of raw materials such as foam, cardboard, wood, etc. or chose a mold with an appropriate size that could be immersed in a rectangular box of 40 × 70 × 40 cm3 filled three-quarter with water as a part of testing (refer to Figure 2f). The students went under similar conditions in choosing the correct amount of concrete aggregates, casting, and curing identical to that of the bowling ball. The testing of the boat, however, was conducted in the water-filled tank as mentioned earlier and was carried out in three phases as follows:
- Assessment phase 1—The empty boat was placed in the water to examine its behavior under external factors; for example, the boat was tested to analyze its stability in the water and float freely for a minimum of 5 s. The students also ensured that the boat was self-balanced while floating on the water (without touching the sides of the water-filled tank/box) (refer to Figure 2c);
- Assessment phase 2—It was assessed for another 60 s to monitor the internal parameters such as the concrete boat’s quality in terms of leakage, water displacement, water absorption by the concrete walls, etc. While water leakage was observed visually, looking for traces of wetness in the interior of the boat, water displacement was monitored by examining the volume of the boat and the height by which the water rises in the tank. The interior of the boat was observed for wetness or moisture to test the absorption of concrete;
- Assessment condition 3—The boat would be lastly tested for its load-carrying capacity. The initial cargo added to the boat was 5 g. Students incremented the weights only if the boat was in a stable condition without rocking to and fro in the tank. Cargo of 5 g was usually added in increments until the point when the vessel began to take on water. However, in some cases, students also used 10 g weights, depending upon the availability of weights. There was no minimum requirement for the cargo weight, and hence, the boat carrying maximum cargo without taking in water was considered for scoring the most in the score sheet. The leakages and similar defects observed in a few cases were fixed before the final trial for marking scores.
2.2.2. Workshop 2
- Activity 1: Exploring rebound effect from different balls—As the workshop started with an ice-breaking activity, the students studied the rebound ability of different sports balls that were identical in shape and size, despite the materials, using a drop test (freely dropping from a specific height and measuring the rebound length);
- Activity 2: Hunting for different ball designs and materials—This activity, bolstering inquiry skills in high school participants, encouraged research on different sports materials such as cowhide, rubber, leather, etc. used in balls. Students studied different balls such as basketball, football, baseball, golf ball, etc. and hypothesized the purpose of each material as applied in a specific sports product. They also examined the design for each sports ball and compared its functionality. They interpreted the results mathematically in the form of graphs because STEM integration was encouraged throughout the activities.
- Activity 3: Investigating energy absorption of materials—During this activity, students familiarized themselves with energy absorption as they calculated the rebound height of a ball when impacted on different materials (floor tile, wooden board, carpet, felt) under freefall, thereby learning about energy absorption of the respective materials. Students also observed surface deformation in the case of different balls’ impact. They also determined conclusions based on their acquired knowledge of the relationship between surface deformation and energy absorption;
- Activity 4: Comparing rolling friction on different surfaces—During this activity, students examined the behavior of different materials with respect to generating a frictional force on a rolling ball. Students tested different sports balls on each mat material one by one to draw out conclusions. They familiarized themselves with various frictional forces—kinetic, rolling, and static. They also interpreted results drawn from rolling ball surface and mat surface to be distinct from each other, and rolling action entirely depended on the materials.
- Baseball—The students who chose to design a baseball needed to overlook the evaluation criteria such as specificity in its diameter, weight, and the maximum ability to rebound on free fall. Since the regularity in the diameter of a handmade ball could not be guaranteed, the test ball diameter was measured using a Vernier scale (refer to Figure 2g). They transferred the knowledge acquired from the workshops to choose varied materials that could satisfy the requisites while testing the product balls. During the testing, the test baseball was freely dropped from a specific height of 1 m to measure the rebound height;
- Golf ball—The golf ball challenge was staged in two sections, i.e., constructing the golf course pit and designing the golf ball for the students who chose the golf ball design project.
2.3. Data Collection Methods
2.3.1. Pre and Post Questionnaires
2.3.2. Evaluation of Project Presentation
3.1. Analysis of Sports Products
3.1.1. Design Product 1
3.1.2. Design Product 2
3.1.3. Design Product 3
- Phase 1—The students designed and constructed a miniature golf course pit (refer to Figure S3 in Supplementary Materials) so that they could test their product golf balls. They set up a course pit, as shown in Figure 2e, according to the required parameters and implemented synthetic materials that contributed to the effective testing of the sports products. The students also applied the knowledge acquired during the sports materials workshop in successfully designing and building the pit. They constructed the course pit using felt and synthetic grass sheet made from polypropylene, polyethylene, and nylon. They were successful in restricting their product balls within the specified length and width of the designed course. While constructing the course pit, they used a standard golf ball for testing the course pit in meeting the adequate condition. The students tested different materials to lay on the pit and rolled the ball down the PVC tube to pass the obstacle, as shown in Figure 2e. The expected functionality of the laid materials was to restrict the rolling of the ball to a specific length of 1.25 m, as shown in Figure 2b.
- Phase 2—The students successfully designed and tested golf balls (refer to Figure 3c) that were able to satisfy the preset conditions (refer to Table 2). They chose optimum materials that contributed to accomplishing their design criteria, specifically balancing the required rebound ability to cross the obstacle and the desired diameter. Evaluating their techniques, the students also considered the efficiency of the ball’s binding process as crucial in obtaining the best results. If the ball was not tightly bound, the rebound results may vary due to the irregularity in its shape and uneven energy transfer. The students also experimented in binding and varying techniques resulting in varying outcomes, as shown in Figure 3c. They studied and applied different scientific principles such as the energy of absorption of different materials when subjected to impact on solid ground.
3.1.4. Design Product 4
3.2. Demonstration and Presentation of Design Projects
3.3. Descriptive Statistical Analysis
- We live in a better world because of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM);
- Learning science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) is essential for my future success;
- I would like to have a career as a scientist or researcher;
- I have the skills to implement a scientific experiment.
4.1. STEM Workshop Outcomes
4.2. A Facilitator’s Outlook on Student Journey with the Design Products
4.3. Discussion on Schoolteachers’ Observations
4.4. Strength, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) Analysis
4.4.1. Strengths and Weaknesses
4.4.2. Opportunities and Threats
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Brannagan, P.M.; Giulianotti, R. Qatar, global sport and the 2022 FIFA world cup. In Leveraging Legacies from Sports Mega-Events: Concepts and Cases; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 154–165. [Google Scholar]
- Jaitman, L.; Scartascini, C. Deporte Para el Desarrollo. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Departamento de Investigación y Economista Jefe. III. Título. IV. Serie. 2017. Available online: https://publications.iadb.org/publications/spanish/document/Deporte-para-el-desarrollo.pdf (accessed on 25 November 2020).
- Craig, E.; Thomas, R.; Hou, C.; Mathur, S. No Shortage of Talent: How the Global Market is Producing the STEM Skills Needed for Growth. Accenture Institute for High Performance (October, 2011). 2011. Available online: www.accenture.com/institute (accessed on 5 December 2020).
- Van Aalderen-Smeets, S.I.; Walma van der Molen, J.H.; Xenidou-Dervou, I. Implicit STEM ability beliefs predict secondary school students’ STEM self-efficacy beliefs and their intention to opt for a STEM field career. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2019, 56, 465–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Banning, J.; Folkestad, J.E. STEM education related dissertation abstracts: A bounded qualitative meta-study. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2012, 21, 730–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahin, A. STEM clubs and science fair competitions: Effects on post-secondary matriculation. J. Stem Educ. 2013, 14, 5–11. [Google Scholar]
- Sahin, A.; Top, N. Teachers’ Reflections on STEM Students on the Stage (SOS) Model. In A Practice-Based Model of STEM Teaching; Brill Sense: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 205–224. [Google Scholar]
- Abdulwahed, M.; Ghani, S.; Hasna, M.O.; Hamouda, A. Life Is Engineering Program: Impact of an Engineering Outreach Project in K-12. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Berlin, Germany, 13–15 March 2013; pp. 827–833. [Google Scholar]
- Osman, I.H.; Anouze, A.L.; Irani, Z.; Lee, H.; Medeni, T.D.; Weerakkody, V. A cognitive analytics management framework for the transformation of electronic government services from users’ perspective to create sustainable shared values. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019, 278, 514–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shediac, R.; Samman, H. Meeting the Employment Challenge in the GCC The Need for a Holistic Strategy. Available online: https://www.iqpc.com/media/8251/10415.pdf (accessed on 1 December 2020).
- Weber, A.S. Linking Education to Creating a Knowledge Society: Qatar’s Investment in the Education Sector. In Handbook of Research on Higher Education in the MENA Region: Policy and Practice; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2014; pp. 52–73. [Google Scholar]
- Sadler, P.M.; Sonnert, G.; Hazari, Z.; Tai, R. Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Sci. Educ. 2012, 96, 411–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wendell, K.; Connolly, K.; Wright, C.; Jarvin, L.; Rogers, C.; Barnett, M.; Marulcu, I. Incorporating Engineering Design into Elementary School Science Curricula. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky, 20–23 June 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Aschbacher, P.R.; Ing, M.; Tsai, S.M. Boosting student interest in science. Phi Delta Kappan 2013, 95, 47–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- George, P.S. The Middle School—And Beyond; ERIC. 1992. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED343254 (accessed on 21 March 2021).
- Kilpatrick, M.; Hebert, E.; Bartholomew, J. College students’ motivation for physical activity: Differentiating men’s and women’s motives for sport participation and exercise. J. Am. Coll. Health 2005, 54, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vallerand, R.J.; Losier, G.F. An integrative analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 1999, 11, 142–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, J.-S.; Song, J. Students’ preferences for different contexts for learning science. Res. Sci. Educ. 1996, 26, 341–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Assessment, P.f.I.S.; Co-Operation, O.f.E. Problem Solving For Tomorrow’s World: First Measures Of Cross-curricular Competencies From Pisa 2003; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Hanrahan, M. The effect of learning environment factors on students’ motivation and learning. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1998, 20, 737–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- OECD. Understanding the Brain: Towards a New Learning Science; OECD Paris: Paris, France, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Dewey, J. Experience and Education. Educ. Forum 1997, 50, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strong, W.B.; Malina, R.M.; Blimkie, C.J.; Daniels, S.R.; Dishman, R.K.; Gutin, B.; Hergenroeder, A.C.; Must, A.; Nixon, P.A.; Pivarnik, J.M. Evidence based physical activity for school-age youth. J. Pediatrics 2005, 146, 732–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pellegrini, B.J. Materials World Modules—2002: A Nationally Representative Evaluation of Classroom Gains. J. Mater. Educ. 2010, 32, 185. [Google Scholar]
- Minner, D.D.; Levy, A.J.; Century, J. Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. J. Res. Sci. Teach. Off. J. Natl. Assoc. Res. Sci. Teach. 2010, 47, 474–496. [Google Scholar]
- Contributors, W. FRC Bowling Ball Competition. Available online: https://www.concrete.org/students/studentcompetitions/frcbowlingballcompetition.aspx (accessed on 13 December 2020).
- Sirianni, V.L.; Lee, K.L.; LeFevre, M.D.; Lindholm, J.W.; Aghayere, A.; Valentine, M. Assessing the Impact of the Concrete Canoe and Steel Bridge Competitions on Civil Engineering Technology Students. In Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 20–23 June 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Kitchen, J.A.; Sonnert, G.; Sadler, P.M. The impact of college-and university-run high school summer programs on students’ end of high school STEM career aspirations. Sci. Educ. 2018, 102, 529–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohr-Schroeder, M.J.; Jackson, C.; Miller, M.; Walcott, B.; Little, D.L.; Speler, L.; Schooler, W.; Schroeder, D.C. Developing Middle School Students’ Interests in STEM via Summer Learning Experiences: See Blue STEM Camp. Sch. Sci. Math. 2014, 114, 291–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anjarsari, P.; Prasetyo, Z.; Susanti, K. Developing Technology and Engineering Literacy for Junior High School Students through STEM-Based Science Learning. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1440, 012107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Halim, L.; Soh, T.; Arsad, N. The effectiveness of STEM mentoring program in promoting interest towards STEM. Proc. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018; 1088, p. 012001. [Google Scholar]
- Schwichow, M.; Zimmerman, C.; Croker, S.; Härtig, H. What students learn from hands-on activities. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2016, 53, 980–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, K. Materials world modules: A view from the science classroom. J. Mater. Educ. 2010, 32, 241. [Google Scholar]
- Conrad, R.-M.; Donaldson, J.A. Engaging the Online Learner: Activities and Resources for Creative Instruction; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Teppo, M.; Soobard, R.; Rannikmäe, M. A Study Comparing Intrinsic Motivation and Opinions on Learning Science (Grades 6) and Taking the International PISA Test (Grade 9). Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, S.H. Environment-Behaviour Studies in the Classroom. J. Des. Technol. Educ. 2009, 9, 77–89. [Google Scholar]
- Yager, R.E.; Penick, J.E. Perceptions of four age groups toward science classes, teachers, and the value of science. Sci. Educ. 1986, 70, 355–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, S.; Myhill, D. ‘Troublesome boys’ and ‘compliant girls’: Gender identity and perceptions of achievement and underachievement. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2004, 25, 547–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drazan, J.F.; Scott, J.M.; Hoke, J.I.; Ledet, E.H. Using Biomedical Engineering and “Hidden Capital” to Provide Educational Outreach to Disadvantaged Populations. In Proceedings of the 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Chicago, IL, USA, 26–30 August 2014; pp. 5160–5163. [Google Scholar]
- Drazan, J.F.; Danielsen, H.; Vercelletto, M.; Loya, A.; Davis, J.; Eglash, R. A Case Study for Integrated STEM Outreach in an Urban Setting Using a Do-It-Yourself Vertical Jump Measurement Platform. In Proceedings of the 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Orlando, FL, USA, 16–20 August 2016; pp. 3027–3030. [Google Scholar]
- Drazan, J.F.; Loya, A.K.; Horne, B.D.; Eglash, R. From Sports to Science: Using Basketball Analytics to Broaden the Appeal of Math and Science among Youth. In Proceedings of the MIT-Sloan Sports Analytics Conference, Boston, MA, USA, 3–4 March 2017; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Drazan, J.F. Biomechanists can revolutionize the STEM pipeline by engaging youth athletes in sports-science based STEM outreach. J. Biomech. 2020, 99, 109511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
|Cycle||Total Number of Students||Number of Withdrawals (Nw)||Qatari Students||Schools|
|Cycle 1: 2012||24||47.1||27||52.9||0||0||19||79.1||26||96.2||1||1|
|Cycle 2: 2013||36||60||24||40||4||6.6||36||100||24||100||2||1|
|Cycle 3: 2014||24||63.5||16||36.5||5||12.5||18||75||14||91.3||2||1|
|Cycle 4: 2015||36||60||24||40||8||13.3||31||86.1||21||87.5||2||1|
|Cycle 5: 2016||29||45.3||35||54.6||10||15.6||27||93.1||35||100||1||2|
|Concrete Bowling ball||Surface smoothness||Smooth surface|
|Weight of the ball||Less than 5.5 Kg|
|Distance traveled||3 m and hit the pins as shown in Figure 2b|
|Concrete Boat||Buoyancy without weights|
|Floating < 5 s|
|Buoyancy without weights|
|Floating < 60 s|
|Loading capacity||Maximum weights|
|Baseball||Diameter||7.3 cm to 7.6 cm|
|Weight||142 g to 149 g|
|Ability to rebound||Maximum|
|Golf ball||Diameter||Between 4.5 and 5.5 cm|
|Ability to rebound||Bounce once and clear the obstacle|
|Ability to roll and stop (Friction)||Stop at target area|
|Sample Groups||Sample Products||Trial Count||Reason of Failure (Refer to Table 2 for Criteria)||Reason for Success|
|Group 1a||Concrete bowling ball||two attempts||The mold used was big.||Changed the mold to make a smaller ball|
|Group 1b||four attempts||Added a plastic ball at the core that balanced the weight required keeping the diameter under the condition.|
|Sample Groups||Sample Products||Trial Count||Reason of Failure (Refer Table 2 for Criteria)||Reason for Success|
|Group 2a||Concrete Boat||three attempts|
|Group 2b||three attempts||Succeeded in the right ratio of materials.|
|Sample Groups||Sample Products||Trial Count||Reason of Failure (Refer to Table 2 for Criteria)||Reason for Success|
|Group 3a||Golf ball||two attempts||The rebound was not enough to jump the obstacle (refer to Figure 2e)||A rubber core was made using glue to create the bouncy effect without increasing weight|
|Group 3b||two attempts||The golf ball made during the first attempt was considered a failure because the students made a better product that gave better results||Used different ratios of the materials.|
|Sample Groups||Sample Products||Trial Count||Reason of Failure (Refer to Table 2 for Criteria)||Reason for Success|
|Group 4a||Baseball||three attempts||The bouncy ball (the core) was small, so the diameter was big with the right weight. |
The final surface was not regular and was not smooth enough.
|Changed materials by using a bigger bouncy ball, cowhide, yarns, and glue.|
|Group 4b||two attempts||The rebound was less.||The binding of the materials was made stronger.|
|Participants N||Pretest Mean (SD)||Posttest Mean (SD)||Mean Diff (SD)||t Value||p-Value|
|1st||51||3.07 (0.932)||3.79 (0.865)||0.730 (1.185)||4.4||0.000|
|2nd||56||3.38 (1.205)||3.98 (1.032)||0.603 (1.680)||2.68||0.01|
|3rd||35||2.98 (0.570)||3.81 (0.900)||0.836 (0.889)||5.56||0.000|
|4th||52||3.46 (0.865)||3.66 (0.913)||0.202 (1.195)||1.22||0.229|
|5th||54||2.31 (0.746)||3.03 (0.693)||0.722 (0.757)||7.02||0.000|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Ali, R.; Bhadra, J.; Siby, N.; Ahmad, Z.; Al-Thani, N.J. A STEM Model to Engage Students in Sustainable Science Education through Sports: A Case Study in Qatar. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3483. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063483
Ali R, Bhadra J, Siby N, Ahmad Z, Al-Thani NJ. A STEM Model to Engage Students in Sustainable Science Education through Sports: A Case Study in Qatar. Sustainability. 2021; 13(6):3483. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063483Chicago/Turabian Style
Ali, Ruba, Jolly Bhadra, Nitha Siby, Zubair Ahmad, and Noora Jabor Al-Thani. 2021. "A STEM Model to Engage Students in Sustainable Science Education through Sports: A Case Study in Qatar" Sustainability 13, no. 6: 3483. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063483