Integrating Service-Learning in STEM Workshops to Promote Digital Skills, Problem-Solving, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Education
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Digital Skills Development Through STEM and Service-Learning
2.2. Problem-Solving Confidence in STEM and Service-Learning Contexts
2.3. STEM Career Interest and Its Development Through Experiential and Purpose-Driven Learning
2.4. Awareness of Sustainable Development Goals in STEM Education: Focus on SDG 4 and SDG 5
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Project Intervention
- 1.
- STEM skill-building activities
- ○
- Circuit design and simulation using software tools;
- ○
- Basic programming and algorithmic thinking through block-based and text-based coding;
- ○
- Engineering design challenges involving real-world constraints (e.g., building simple renewable energy models);
- ○
- Collaborative problem-solving exercises that emphasized teamwork, creativity, and iteration.
- 2.
- Problem-based learning (PBL) projects
- ○
- Define the problem based on local needs (e.g., access to clean water, energy use);
- ○
- Ideate and prototype solutions using the skills acquired in the technical sessions;
- ○
- Test and refine their prototypes through peer and mentor feedback.
- 3.
- Service-learning application
- ○
- Partnering with local organizations, NGOs, or school staff to understand challenges;
- ○
- Developing and presenting their projects to stakeholders or community members;
- ○
- Reflecting on the social impact and ethical dimensions of their work.
- 4.
- SDG awareness and reflection
- ○
- Mini-lectures or multimedia presentations on global and local education/gender disparities;
- ○
- Interactive discussions and debates linking STEM to sustainable development;
- ○
- Guided reflective journaling and group sharing to deepen understanding of students’ roles as changemakers.
3.2. Research Objectives
- ✓
- Assess the impact of the STEM service-learning intervention on students’ digital skills. This includes examining pre- and post-intervention changes in students’ self-reported abilities to use, apply, and create with digital tools in STEM contexts.
- ✓
- Evaluate changes in students’ problem-solving confidence following the intervention. The study explores how engaging in real-world, team-based STEM projects influences students’ confidence in approaching complex challenges.
- ✓
- Investigate the development of students’ interest in STEM careers. The research examines whether exposure to socially relevant, hands-on STEM experiences fosters greater motivation to pursue STEM-related academic and career pathways.
- ✓
- Examine students’ awareness and understanding of SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality). The goal is to determine whether and how participation in the workshops enhances students’ global citizenship and their recognition of STEM’s role in addressing societal challenges.
- ✓
- Explore gender-related outcomes, particularly among female students, in relation to STEM engagement and self-perception. The study seeks to understand whether the intervention supports greater confidence, leadership, and participation among girls in STEM activities.
- ✓
- Analyze the role of service-learning in enhancing students’ engagement, collaboration, and connection between academic knowledge and community impact. This includes investigating how authentic, community-focused projects influence students’ motivation and perceived relevance of STEM learning.
3.3. Research Population
- ○
- Digital literacy, including knowledge of software applications, programming environments (e.g., Scratch, Python-3.10), and hands-on use of hardware (e.g., microcontrollers, circuit design platforms);
- ○
- Problem-solving self-efficacy, measured through validated scales that assess confidence in approaching and resolving technical and real-world problems;
- ○
- Interest in STEM careers, captured through attitudinal surveys and open-ended responses exploring their career aspirations;
- ○
- Awareness and understanding of SDG 4 and SDG 5, evaluated through structured interviews and reflective activities that encouraged students to articulate their perspectives on education, gender equality, and the societal role of STEM;
- ○
- Gender-related attitudes toward STEM, assessed via questionnaires and focus group discussions that explored perceptions of gender roles, stereotypes, and inclusivity in STEM fields.
3.4. Research Instruments
- Likert-scale items (ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree);
- Multiple-choice questions on digital literacy and knowledge of SDG 4 and SDG 5;
- Gender attitude scales to assess beliefs about gender roles and inclusion in STEM.
- Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of students (especially female participants), facilitators, and community partners. The interviews explored participants’ experiences, perceptions of learning, and views on how STEM and service-learning intersected with real-world issues.
- Focus groups were organized with small student teams at the end of the workshop series. Discussions centered on collaborative dynamics, project-based learning, and the perceived societal value of their work.
- Student reflection journals were collected weekly, providing narrative insights into personal growth, challenges faced, and evolving perspectives on STEM and sustainability. Students were guided by prompts such as “What did I learn this week?” and “How does this connect to making a difference in my community?”
3.5. Research Plan
- Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, frequencies) were calculated to summarize baseline levels of digital skills, problem-solving confidence, STEM interest, and SDG awareness.
- Paired-sample t-tests were used to assess significant changes between pre- and post-intervention scores on key variables.
- Where appropriate, ANOVA tests were used to explore differences across subgroups (e.g., gender, grade level).
- Effect sizes (Cohen’s d) were calculated to determine the magnitude of observed changes.
- Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
- Familiarization with the data through repeated reading of transcripts and journals;
- Initial coding of meaningful data segments using NVivo software (version 15);
- Development of themes by grouping similar codes and identifying overarching concepts;
- Review and refinement of themes for coherence and distinctiveness;
- Interpretation of themes in relation to the research questions and SDG framework.
4. Results
- Digital skills;
- Problem-solving confidence;
- Awareness of SDGs.
- ✓
- Independent variable (IV): Time (two levels: Pre-Test, Post-Test) or Group (e.g., Gender: Male, Female).
- ✓
- Dependent variables (DVs): Digital Skills Score, Problem-Solving Confidence Score, SDG Awareness Score.
- Digital skills ↔ problem-solving confidence: strong positive correlation.
- STEM attitude change ↔ SDG awareness change: strong positive correlation.
- Gender ↔ confidence gains: weak positive correlation (girls improved more).
- Gender ↔ digital skills gain: no significant relationship.
- Pre-test confidence score (continuous);
- Gender (dummy coded: 0 = male, 1 = female);
- Participation in service-learning project (binary: 0 = no, 1 = yes);
- Time spent on STEM projects per week (continuous, in hours).
- Pre-test confidence was the strongest predictor, β = 0.52, p < 0.001.
- Gender had a modest but significant effect, β = 0.21, p = 0.023, suggesting that female students reported greater confidence gains.
- Participation in service-learning was also a significant predictor, β = 0.28, p = 0.008.
- Time spent on projects did not significantly predict post-intervention confidence, β = 0.11, p = 0.19.
- Students who started with higher confidence were more likely to finish confident (as expected).
- Girls reported greater increases in confidence than boys, even when controlling for pre-test scores.
- Service-learning participation was an independent and significant predictor, supporting the effectiveness of the intervention structure.
- Time spent did not predict outcomes significantly—suggesting quality of engagement may matter more than quantity.
- Increased STEM interest after the intervention;
- Participation in leadership roles;
- Service-learning project involvement.
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
7. Limits and Challenges
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- AlAli, Rommel. 2024. Enhancing 21st century skills through integrated STEM education using project-oriented problem-based learning. Geo Journal of Tourism and Geosites 53: 421–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alavala, Nikhila, Nimisha Roy, Melinda McDaniel, Max Mahdi Roozbahani, Rodrigo Borela, and Parisa Babolhavaeji. 2025. Beyond Buzzwords: Making Sustainability a Pillar of the Computing Curriculum. Paper presented at the 30th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, June 27–July 2; pp. 389–95. [Google Scholar]
- Anurag, Alamuri Suryanarayana, Swathi Alakkodan, Rohith Ramesh, and Johnpaul Muhammad. 2025. 5G to 6G: Empowering the Workforce Skills for Next-Gen Connectivity. In 5G/6G Advancements in Communication Technologies for Agile Management. Hershey: IGI Global Scientific Publishing, pp. 143–68. [Google Scholar]
- Argentin, Gianluca, Gianpaolo Barbetta, Mario Agostino Maggioni, Domenico Rossignoli, and Luca Stella. 2022. Service learning, well-being and school performance: Causal evidence from Italian High school students. In Service Learning, Well-Being and School Performance: Causal Evidence from Italian High School Students. Milano: Vita e Pensiero, pp. 1–81. [Google Scholar]
- Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bush, Seth, Ashley Calloway, Emily Bush, and Ed Himelblau. 2022. A course-based teaching experience for STEM undergraduates improves student perceptions of teaching self-efficacy and attitudes toward teaching careers. CBE—Life Sciences Education 21: ar7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cassibba, Jared. 2021. The Effect of Difficulty Orientation and Self-Efficacy on Performance in STEM: A Quantitative Correlational Study. Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Cervone, Daniel. 2023. Theory and application in personality science: The case of social-cognitive theory. Psychology and Developing Societies 35: 220–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Yu, Winnie Wing Mui So, Jinxin Zhu, and Stephen Wing Kai Chiu. 2024. STEM learning opportunities and career aspirations: The interactive effect of students’ self-concept and perceptions of STEM professionals. International Journal of STEM Education 11: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chimwayange, Chris. 2024. Promoting student engagement using project based learning as service-based skills development. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 35: 1429–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colyer, Ruth Renee. 2024. Leveraging a Community of Practice to Advance STEM Education Reform and Promote Teacher and Student Self-Efficacy. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Corwith, Susan. 2021. Programming for talent development outside of school. In Talent Development as a Framework for Gifted Education. London: Routledge, pp. 63–93. [Google Scholar]
- Creamer, Elizabeth G. 2024. Visual Displays in Qualitative and Mixed Method Research: A Comprehensive Guide. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Creswell, John W., and Vicki L. Plano Clark. 2017. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. New York: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
- Day, David V. 2024. Developing Leaders and Leadership: Principles, Practices, and Processes. Berlin: Springer Nature. [Google Scholar]
- DeJaeghere, Joan G. 2009. Critical citizenship education for multicultural societies. Inter-American Journal of Education for Democracy 2: 222–36. [Google Scholar]
- Dolgopolovas, Vladimiras, and Valentina Dagiene. 2024. Competency-based TPACK approaches to computational thinking and integrated STEM: A conceptual exploration. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 32: e22788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dou, Remy, Zahra Hazari, Katherine Dabney, Gerhard Sonnert, and Philip Sadler. 2019. Early informal STEM experiences and STEM identity: The importance of talking science. Science Education 103: 623–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eccles, Jacquelynne S., and Allan Wigfield. 2002. Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology 53: 109–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ehlers, Ulf-Daniel. 2024. Towards a Future Skills Framework for Higher Education. In Creating the University of the Future: A Global View on Future Skills and Future Higher Education. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 21–60. [Google Scholar]
- El Faouri, Bayan F., and Magda Sibley. 2024. Balancing social and cultural priorities in the UN 2030 sustainable development goals (SDGs) for UNESCO world heritage cities. Sustainability 16: 5833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyler, Janet, and Dwight E. Giles, Jr. 1999. Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning? Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc. [Google Scholar]
- Faruqi, Farah. 2024. Analysis of Integrated STEM Education: How They are Reflected in Integrated STEM Curriculum Writing and Classroom Implementation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Fraser, Barry J. 1981. Test of science-related attitudes. Science Education 62: 509–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fredricks, Jennifer A., Tara Hofkens, Ming-Te Wang, Elizabeth Mortenson, and Paul Scott. 2018. Supporting Girls’ and Boys’ Engagement in Math and Science Learning: A Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 55: 271–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furco, Andrew. 2010. The community as a resource for learning: An analysis of academic service-learning in primary and secondary education. In Service-Learning and Community Engagement: Comparative Perspectives. Edited by H. S. Noor. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 65–82. [Google Scholar]
- González-Pérez, Susana, Ruth Mateos de Cabo, and Milagros Sáinz. 2020. Girls in STEM: Is it a female role-model thing? Frontiers in Psychology 11: 564148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Han, Seong Won. 2017. What motivates high-school students to pursue STEM careers? The influence of public attitudes towards science and technology in comparative perspective. Journal of Education and Work 30: 632–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hurley, Mairéad, Deirdre Butler, and Eilish McLoughlin. 2024. STEM teacher professional learning through immersive STEM learning placements in industry: A systematic literature review. Journal for STEM Education Research 7: 122–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Idris, Rashidin, Priyalatha Govindasamy, Suppiah Nachiappan, and Juppri Bacotang. 2023. Examining moderator factors influencing students’ interest in STEM careers: The role of demographic, family and gender. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development 12: 2298–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janius, Naldo, Mohammad Aniq Bin Amdan, Mohamad Aidil Hazidi Bin Kasdiah, Nur Izzah Binti Harifin, and Fatin Asyiera Nabila Binti Shamshol Bhari. 2024. Integrating science, technology, engineering and mathematics (stem) into TVET programs toward early childhood education in Unitar international university, Malaysia. International Journal of Science and Research Archive 12: 2167–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jenkins, Melissa C. 2024. Mixed-Methods Research. In Research Methods in Special Education. London: Routledge, pp. 239–55. [Google Scholar]
- Khalid, Ika Liana, Mohd Nor Syahrir Abdullah, and Hidayah Mohd Fadzil. 2024. A systematic review: Digital learning in STEM education. Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology 51: 98–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S. 2022. Gender and Education. In Governing the Interlinkages Between the SDGs. London: Routledge, pp. 158–73. [Google Scholar]
- Kier, Meredith W., Margaret R. Blanchard, Jason W. Osborne, and Jennifer L. Albert. 2014. The development of the STEM career interest survey (STEM-CIS). Research in Science Education 44: 461–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klinger, Ulrike, and Jakob Svensson. 2023. The power of code: Women and the making of the digital world. In Women in the Digital World. London: Routledge, pp. 84–99. [Google Scholar]
- Leal Filho, Walter, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, and Tony Wall. 2020. Quality Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Levy, Brett L., Alandeon W. Oliveira, and Cornelia B. Harris. 2021. The potential of “civic science education”: Theory, research, practice, and uncertainties. Science Education 105: 1053–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lo, Noble Po-Kan. 2024. The confluence of digital literacy and eco-consciousness: Harmonizing digital skills with sustainable practices in education. Platforms 2: 15–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, Elizabeth M., and Ginger Gummelt. 2020. Experiential service learning: Building skills and sensitivity with Kolb’s learning theory. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education 41: 219–32. [Google Scholar]
- Longlands, Helen, Rosie Peppin Vaughan, and Elaine Unterhalter. 2024. Gender, missing data and SDG 4. In Achieving Equitable Education. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 138–55. [Google Scholar]
- López, Pepa, Pep Simó, and Jordi Marco. 2023. Understanding STEM career choices: A systematic mapping. Heliyon 9: e16676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Machin, David, and Yueyue Liu. 2024. How tick list sustainability distracts from actual sustainable action: The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Critical Discourse Studies 21: 164–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martín-Sánchez, Alberto, David González-Gómez, and Jin Su Jeong. 2022. Service Learning as an Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) Teaching Strategy: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation in a STEM University Course. Sustainability 14: 6965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morrison, Judith, Janet Frost, Chad Gotch, Amy Roth McDuffie, Bruce Austin, and Brian French. 2021. Teachers’ role in students’ learning at a project-based STEM high school: Implications for teacher education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 19: 1103–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nitzan-Tamar, Ortal, and Zehavit Kohen. 2022. Secondary school mathematics and entrance into the STEM professions: A longitudinal study. International Journal of STEM Education 9: 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novelli, Marina, and Adam Jones. 2017. Goal 4: Quality Education-Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. In Transforming Tourism: Tourism in the 2030 Agenda. Berlin: Tourism Watch, pp. 27–33. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. 2019. OECD Skills Outlook 2019: Thriving in a Digital World. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rafanan, Renzo Jay L., Clarisse Yimyr De Guzman, and Danilo V. Rogayan, Jr. 2020. Pursuing stem careers: Perspectives of senior high school students. Participatory Educational Research 7: 38–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinhold, Sarah, Doris Holzberger, and Tina Seidel. 2018. Encouraging a career in science: A research review of secondary schools’ effects on students’ STEM orientation. Studies in Science Education 54: 69–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rieckmann, M. 2017. Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Sánchez-Tapia, Ingrid, and Andaleeb Alam. 2020. Towards an Equal Future: Reimagining Girls’ Education Through STEM. New York: UNICEF. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, Wafa, Raisuyah Bhagwan, and Manju Singh. 2025. Adopting Community-Based Participatory Research for Advancing Sustainable Development. In Best Practices in Sustainable Development Goals 177. Edited by Sujit Kumar Paul and K. Gireesan. India: Concept Publishing Company. [Google Scholar]
- Su, King-Dow. 2024. The challenge and opportunities of STEM learning efficacy for living technology through a transdisciplinary problem-based learning activity. Journal of Science Education and Technology 33: 429–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sultan, Ulrika, Cecilia Axell, and Jonas Hallström. 2024. Bringing girls and women into STEM?: Girls’ technological activities and conceptions when participating in an all-girl technology camp. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 34: 647–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Syed, Moin, Eileen L. Zurbriggen, Martin M. Chemers, Barbara K. Goza, Steve Bearman, Faye J. Crosby, Jerome M. Shaw, Lisa Hunter, and Elizabeth M. Morgan. 2019. The role of self-efficacy and identity in mediating the effects of STEM support experiences. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 19: 7–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taneja, Mohit, Ravi Kiran, and Subhas Chandra Bose. 2022. Critical analysis of Kolb experiential learning process: Gender perspective. International Journal of Health Sciences 6 S1: 8713–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tawfik, Andrew, Rebecca J. Trueman, and Matthew M. Lorz. 2014. Engaging non-scientists in STEM through problem-based learning and service learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 8: 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tillman, Daniel A., Song A. An, and Rachel L. Boren. 2015. Assessment of creativity in arts and STEM integrated pedagogy by pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 23: 301–27. [Google Scholar]
- Tomei, Lawrence A., Jesse Maine, Karina Moussa, Melissa B. Holler, Brianne Hobbs, and Shannon Austin. 2024. The top 12 technologies for teaching and learning in the post-pandemic era. In Exploring Technology-Infused Education in the Post-Pandemic Era. Hershey: IGI Global, pp. 1–95. [Google Scholar]
- Tripon, Cristina. 2024. Bridging horizons: Exploring STEM students’ perspectives on service-learning and storytelling activities for community engagement and gender equality. Trends in Higher Education 3: 324–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Umoke, Chukwudum Collins, Musa Adekunle Ayanwale, Sunday Odo Nwangbo, Ngele Cletus Ezeoke, Sunday Okechukwu Abonyi, and Stella Oluwakemi Olatunbosun. 2025. Modeling instructional strategies and their transformative role in enhancing engagement and equity in computer studies: A quasi-experimental study. Discover Education 4: 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Matre, Joseph Charles, Arjen de Wit, and Frederique Demeijer. 2025. Motivating Business Students for Civic Education: Design Principles for Aligning Civic Engagement Programs with Student Motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Bin, and Ping-Ping Li. 2024. Digital creativity in STEM education: The impact of digital tools and pedagogical learning models on the students’ creative thinking skills development. Interactive Learning Environments 32: 2633–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wickliff, Gregory, Allison Elowson, Christopher Gordon, Kristen Fye, Alisa Wickliff, David K. Pugalee, and Paul Hunter. 2024. Student Research, Communication, and Scientific Reasoning in a Mathematics Enrichment Program. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research 25: 16–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiebe, Eric, Alana Unfried, and Malinda Faber. 2018. The relationship of STEM attitudes and career interest. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 14: em1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]






| Variable | Pre-Test Mean (SD) | Post-Test Mean (SD) | t(59) | p | Cohen’s d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digital skills score | 3.10 (0.64) | 4.02 (0.55) | 9.27 | <0.001 | 1.20 |
| Problem-solving confidence | 2.98 (0.70) | 3.95 (0.61) | 8.54 | <0.001 | 1.10 |
| STEM career interest | 3.25 (0.68) | 3.70 (0.72) | 4.02 | <0.001 | 0.52 |
| Awareness of SDGs (4 and 5) | 2.75 (0.80) | 4.10 (0.60) | 11.15 | <0.001 | 1.44 |
| 3.05 (0.85) | 3.90 (0.70) | 6.89 | <0.001 | 0.89 |
| Effect | Pillai’s Trace | F | df | p | Partial η2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time | 0.45 | 15.30 | 3, 56 | <0.001 | 0.45 |
| Gender | 0.08 | 1.54 | 3, 56 | 0.21 | 0.08 |
| Time × Gender | 0.12 | 2.65 | 3, 56 | 0.05 | 0.12 |
| Dependent Variable | Effect | F | df | p | Partial η2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digital skills | Time | 57.60 | 1, 58 | <0.001 | 0.50 |
| Time × Gender | 7.80 | 1, 58 | 0.007 | 0.12 | |
| Problem-solving confidence | Time | 49.20 | 1, 58 | <0.001 | 0.46 |
| Time × Gender | 2.10 | 1, 58 | 0.15 | 0.04 | |
| SDG awareness | Time | 63.40 | 1, 58 | <0.001 | 0.52 |
| Time × Gender | 1.00 | 1, 58 | 0.32 | 0.02 |
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Digital skills (post-test) | — | ||||
| 2. Problem-solving confidence (post-test) | 0.62 | — | |||
| 3. Change in STEM attitudes | 0.44 | 0.53 | — | ||
| 4. Change in SDG awareness | 0.49 | 0.50 | 0.61 | — | |
| 5. Gender (0 = male, 1 = female) | –0.08 | 0.23 | 0.18 | 0.20 | — |
| Predictor | B | SE B | β | t | p | B |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.84 | 0.42 | — | 4.38 | <0.001 | 1.84 |
| Pre-test confidence | 0.61 | 0.12 | 0.52 | 5.08 | <0.001 | 0.61 |
| Gender (0 = male, 1 = female) | 0.38 | 0.16 | 0.21 | 2.34 | 0.023 | 0.38 |
| Service-learning participation | 0.44 | 0.16 | 0.28 | 2.81 | 0.008 | 0.44 |
| Time on projects (hrs/week) | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 1.32 | 0.192 | 0.07 |
| Increased Interest | No Increase | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Girls | 28 | 7 | 35 |
| Boys | 15 | 10 | 25 |
| Total | 43 | 17 | 60 |
| Leadership Role | No Role | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Girls | 20 | 15 | 35 |
| Boys | 9 | 16 | 25 |
| Total | 29 | 31 | 60 |
| Test | χ2 (df) | p | ϕ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender × increased STEM interest | 4.57 (1) | 0.033 | 0.28 |
| Gender × leadership role | 4.23 (1) | 0.040 | 0.27 |
| Theme | Description | Sample Participant Quotes |
|---|---|---|
| Empowerment through skill use | Students reported increased confidence in applying STEM skills to meaningful tasks. | “I never thought I could build something useful, but now I feel like I can actually help.” “Using circuits and coding made me feel capable—it wasn’t just theory.” |
| Connection to real-world issues | Students developed a stronger sense of how STEM applies beyond academic contexts. | “This made me realize STEM isn’t just for school—it’s for life and helping others.” “Now I understand how tech can solve real problems, not just imaginary ones.” |
| Gender confidence and inclusion | Female participants reported greater confidence and increased leadership during group tasks. | “I was shy at first, but now I lead the coding part for our team.” “Seeing other girls in charge inspired me to speak up and take the lead.” |
| Value of community engagement | Students valued the service-learning component, feeling their work had meaningful local impact. | “Knowing our project could help the school made us try even harder.” “It felt good to help others while learning—like our work mattered.” |
| Collaboration and teamwork | Students highlighted improved teamwork, communication, and group problem-solving. | “We had to listen to each other and work as one group—it taught me how to be a better teammate.” “Even when we disagreed, we figured it out together.” |
| Growth in STEM identity | Participants began to see themselves as legitimate STEM learners and potential professionals. | “Before this, I wasn’t sure if STEM was for me. Now, I feel like I could really be an engineer.” “I’m actually thinking of studying technology now—I didn’t before.” |
| Awareness of social impact | Students expressed a greater understanding of how STEM addresses sustainability and equity issues. | “We didn’t just make a project—we thought about how it helps people.” “This helped me care more about the environment and what tech can do for it.” |
| Reflection and self-awareness | Students gained insight into their own learning preferences and capabilities. | “I learned I actually enjoy problem-solving and figuring things out—it makes me feel smart.” “This showed me I’m more creative than I thought when it comes to coding.” |
| Increased motivation to learn | The relevance and hands-on nature of the project increased intrinsic motivation and interest. | “When we knew the project would help our community, it made me want to learn more.” “It was fun because it didn’t feel like regular class—it was more exciting.” |
| STEM identity development | Students began to see themselves as “STEM people”—capable of pursuing further STEM learning. | “Now I want to be an engineer and build tech for good.” “This made me realize I like figuring things out.” |
| Awareness of the SDGs | Students gained understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 4 and 5. | “I didn’t know about the SDGs before—now I see how STEM fits in.” “Helping girls in STEM is part of solving SDG 5.” |
| Design thinking and innovation | Students described learning to ideate, test, and improve STEM-based solutions for real-world use. | “We tried so many ideas until one worked—it felt like being an inventor.” “It was cool to solve a problem from scratch.” |
| Increased sustainability awareness | Many connected their STEM projects to environmental or social sustainability issues. | “We made something that saves energy—that felt important.” “Our project reused old tech, so it helped the planet.” |
| Student agency and leadership | Students reported increased ownership of their learning and decision-making roles. | “Our teacher let us choose our project—I felt trusted.” “I got to lead our final presentation and that was new for me.” |
| Career inspiration and aspirations | Exposure to STEM tools and problem-solving led students to imagine future career paths. | “I didn’t think STEM was for me, but now I want to study computer science.” “I want to do something that helps people with technology.” |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the author. 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tripon, C. Integrating Service-Learning in STEM Workshops to Promote Digital Skills, Problem-Solving, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Education. Soc. Sci. 2025, 14, 671. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14110671
Tripon C. Integrating Service-Learning in STEM Workshops to Promote Digital Skills, Problem-Solving, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Education. Social Sciences. 2025; 14(11):671. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14110671
Chicago/Turabian StyleTripon, Cristina. 2025. "Integrating Service-Learning in STEM Workshops to Promote Digital Skills, Problem-Solving, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Education" Social Sciences 14, no. 11: 671. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14110671
APA StyleTripon, C. (2025). Integrating Service-Learning in STEM Workshops to Promote Digital Skills, Problem-Solving, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Education. Social Sciences, 14(11), 671. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14110671

