Impact Framework for Transforming STEAM Education: A Multi-Level Approach to Evidence-Based Reform

Abstract

This paper presents the development of an Impact Framework for STEAM education created as part of a project to support systemic, evidence-based reform. The framework was derived from an extensive synthesis of data collected through policy mapping, national and European strategy reviews, comparative case studies, and three stakeholder consultations with educators, industry representatives, and policymakers. The analysis used thematic synthesis, root cause analysis, and impact mapping to link the identified challenges with their causes, proposed actions, and measurable indicators. The resulting framework is organised into four interconnected domains: Policy and Governance, Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure, Educator Competence and Resources, and Collaboration Ecosystem, each linked to specific stakeholders, proposed solutions, and anticipated benefits. By consolidating diverse evidence into a coherent logic chain, the framework provides a practical and adaptable tool for guiding reforms that strengthen the coherence, inclusivity, and sustainability of STEAM education across various contexts.

1. Introduction

Across Europe, STEAM education is increasingly recognised as a catalyst for innovation, sustainability, and inclusive growth. By blending science, technology, engineering, the arts, and mathematics into interdisciplinary learning, it has the potential to equip learners with transversal competences such as problem-solving, creativity, systems thinking, and collaboration, skills essential for addressing complex societal and economic challenges (Zhang & Jia, 2024; Chappell et al., 2025). A growing body of research emphasises its transformative capacity not only in enhancing academic outcomes, but also in fostering civic engagement, industry readiness, and social equity (Nyaaba et al., 2024; Carter et al., 2021; Allina, 2018; Perales & Aróstegui, 2024).

However, despite its strategic importance, the adoption of STEAM education remains uneven and fragmented. Most national reforms have concentrated on subject-specific curriculum updates or isolated pilot projects, rather than fully embedding STEAM principles into educational ecosystems (Mazzeo-Ortolani, 2025). This fragmentation is reflected in divergent definitions of STEAM, inconsistent levels of integration across disciplines, and a lack of common quality standards (European Commission, 2025; Belbase et al., 2022). Without a coherent, system-wide approach that links policy design, institutional structures, teacher professional development, and cross-sector collaboration, STEAM risks remaining a collection of isolated initiatives rather than a sustained driver of transformation (Chappell et al., 2025; Anisimova et al., 2018).

Persistent barriers are well-documented in the literature: limited infrastructure and resources (Herro et al., 2019; Spyropoulou et al., 2025), insufficient professional development opportunities (Spyropoulou & Kameas, 2024; Milara & Orduña, 2024), weak school–industry collaboration (Watters et al., 2016), underrepresentation of women and other marginalised groups in STEAM fields (Meoli et al., 2024; Charlesworth & Banaji, 2019; Kricorian et al., 2020), and the lack of inclusive pedagogical strategies for learners with disabilities (Ariza & Hernández Hernández, 2025; Andrés et al., 2025). These challenges, combined with the absence of robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms (Pokropek, 2024), limit the scalability of good practices and impede systemic reform.

This study responds to that need by presenting a multi-level Impact Analysis Framework for STEAM education. Developed within the The SEER project (Horizon), the framework links empirical evidence to policy-relevant actions at the macro (policy and governance), meso (institutional and organisational), and micro (classroom and pedagogical) levels. The Framework synthesises findings from policy mapping, stakeholder engagement, and best practice analysis to define strategic priorities for STEAM adoption in Europe, while translating this strategic vision into operational, measurable pathways for change. Drawing on data from project results, including surveys, focus groups, and case studies, the framework connects systemic gaps to root causes, enabling conditions, and impact indicators.

This article advances the discussion on systemic STEAM reform by:

• Presenting an Impact Analysis Framework that aligns with European and national strategic goals.
• Demonstrating how identified systemic gaps can be linked to root causes, enabling conditions, and measurable impact indicators.
• Offering actionable guidance for policymakers, institutional leaders, and educators seeking to drive coherent, long-term change.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Methodology

To evaluate the potential for systemic transformation of STEAM education in Europe, this study applies a structured impact analysis methodology that integrates principles from logic models, theory of change, and contribution analysis. This combined approach enables mapping of causal relationships between identified challenges and anticipated outcomes in both policy and practice. It is particularly suited to complex education systems, where change depends on multiple interacting factors and diverse stakeholders. The approach begins with logic modelling to articulate the causal sequence linking inputs, activities, outputs, short- and medium-term outcomes, and long-term systemic impacts (Funnell & Rogers, 2011). This provides both a visual and conceptual representation of the change pathway. Theory of change is then applied to make explicit the underlying assumptions, contextual factors, and enabling conditions required for these pathways to be effective (Connell & Kubisch, 1998). Complementing these, contribution analysis assesses the plausibility that the identified actions and enabling conditions will lead to the intended outcomes, even in non-linear and multi-actor environments (Mayne, 2017). This methodological triangulation aligns with the EU Better Regulation Toolbox1, which promotes evidence-based and impact-oriented policymaking grounded in stakeholder engagement and measurable indicators.

2.2. Data Sources

This research is based on the analysis of the deliverables and outcomes of the European programme’s three work packages. WP1 results included policy mapping and comparative analysis of national STEAM strategies and frameworks. Specifically, an extensive report on STEAM education was utilised, which encompassed a review of literature, practices, and EU STEAM policies, as well as a qualitative analysis of funded STEAM programmes, drawing on eight national case studies and the analysis of more than 800 STEAM-related projects. WP2 results comprised reports from case studies, seminars, and focus groups involving various stakeholders, including 10 focus groups and 5 thematic seminars. In addition, WP3 included research through three targeted surveys designed to identify challenges, needs, collaboration patterns, and stakeholder perspectives on STEAM education, covering pre-service and in-service teachers, policymakers, and industry representatives. These surveys engaged over 700 educators, more than 30 industry representatives, and participants from six policy-focused country cases. The instruments examined perceived needs, collaboration practices, and systemic barriers associated with implementing STEAM education. In addition to identifying competence gaps and resource limitations, WP3 provided insight into how educators interpret and apply STEAM approaches in their daily practice, as well as how stakeholders perceive the future potential and barriers to STEAM integration. The detailed design and statistical results of these instruments are presented in the project deliverables. This study builds upon these validated datasets to develop and apply the STEAM Impact Framework. Thus, the findings served as a key evidence base for defining impact domains and indicators, enabling the development of a grounded and stakeholder-informed framework. The deliverables are available on the project website.2

2.3. Data Analysis

This study employed the thematic analysis approach (Clarke & Braun, 2014) to analyse and code the results derived from the deliverables of the European project. Initially, the key findings of each deliverable were coded separately, focusing on areas such as inclusion, curriculum coherence, teachers’ professional development, infrastructure, funding opportunities, and industry collaboration. Subsequently, cross-report triangulation was conducted to verify the consistency of the findings. Once the thematic categories were defined, they were revised and grouped to reflect the structural areas relevant for policy reform and system transformation.

The analytical process commenced with a thematic synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data derived from surveys, policy mapping, and case studies. Following Clarke and Braun’s (2014) six-phase model, the process involved iterative familiarisation with the dataset, generation of initial codes, organisation of codes into candidate themes, and refinement of these themes to ensure conceptual clarity and consistency. By systematically coding evidence across multiple data sources, recurring patterns of challenges, enablers, and systemic needs were identified while preserving stakeholder-specific nuances.

To move beyond surface-level descriptions, a modified root cause analysis was conducted, drawing inspiration from the “5 Whys” technique (Gangidi, 2019), which was adapted to account for the complexity of education systems. This adaptation enabled the identification of deeper structural and cultural drivers, such as fragmented governance, short-term funding cycles, or misaligned teacher training frameworks, that underpin more visible barriers like insufficient infrastructure or lack of instructional resources. By distinguishing proximate issues from their root causes, this stage provided a diagnostic foundation for subsequent solution design.

The final analytical phase applied impact mapping to connect each identified challenge and its underlying cause with targeted interventions, relevant stakeholder groups, desired systemic changes, and measurable indicators. This approach, inspired by established logic modelling and theory of change practices (Funnell & Rogers, 2011; Mayne, 2017), provides a structured way to visualise how specific actions contribute to broader educational outcomes. Each challenge was therefore linked to its root cause, associated stakeholders, proposed solutions, anticipated benefits, and indicators for monitoring progress and impact.

The STEAM impact indicators were developed through a comprehensive review of relevant European frameworks, complemented by literature on competence frameworks and studies proposing specific STEAM-related indicators (National Research Council, 2013; Means et al., 2015; Kim & Kim, 2016; National Science Board, 2023; Ussher et al., 2023; Redd et al., 2024; Spyropoulou & Kameas, 2024). Based on this synthesis, the proposed indicators were organised into four interrelated categories. Student Outcomes include indicators related to cognitive skills, socio-emotional development, and transversal competences such as creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving. Teacher Development focuses on professional learning, self-efficacy, and the transformation of teaching practices. Educational System indicators capture dimensions such as resource allocation, policy support, and mechanisms for programme monitoring and improvement. Finally, Broader Societal Impact indicators address increased interest in STEAM careers, enhanced community engagement and partnerships, and contributions to innovation, sustainability, and social well-being. Together, these categories provide a structured and measurable approach for assessing systemic change in STEAM education across levels. The outcome of this process was a STEAM Impact Analysis Matrix, in which each row represents a complete logic chain linking all the aforementioned factors.

3. Results

This section presents the results following the analytical sequence outlined in Section 2.3. The findings are organised according to the main stages of the analysis: thematic synthesis, root cause analysis, and impact mapping. Each subsection builds on the previous one, illustrating how the identified challenges were synthesised into systemic gaps, linked to their underlying causes, and translated into actionable components of the Impact Framework.

3.1. Challenges and Gaps

Based on the analysis of the overall reports and deliverables from multiple Work Packages, STEAM education across the European Union appears to face several persistent challenges and systemic gaps. These challenges appear to both reveal the existing gaps in STEAM education and highlight proposals and actions that can lead to the desired outcomes. These challenges (or gaps) represent the first analytical step described in Section 2.3, which involves identifying systemic barriers that hinder the effective implementation of STEAM education. The overall aim of the research was to develop an Impact Framework that suggests actions and changes based on systematic research findings. This section presents the identified challenges and needs, grouped into four domains of change: Policy and Governance, Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure, Educator Competence Development and Resources, and Collaboration Ecosystem. In total, 21 gaps were identified and are summarised in Figure 1. Each domain highlights specific issues and examples drawn from triangulated data, illustrating how the findings connect to the structure of the Impact Framework.

The Policy and Governance domain concerns the overarching frameworks and strategic orientations that guide how STEAM education is interpreted and implemented across Europe. The analysis reveals inconsistencies in policy alignment and fragmented governance structures that prevent coherent scaling and sustainability. Persistent issues include the absence of shared curriculum standards, limited integration of European and national strategies, and insufficient mechanisms for long-term monitoring and evaluation. Stakeholders emphasise the need for more coordinated frameworks that balance flexibility with common principles, thereby ensuring greater policy coherence and a long-term commitment to STEAM reform.

The Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure domain addresses the organisational and operational settings that shape how STEAM education functions at the school level. Gaps in this area relate to inadequate learning environments, rigid timetabling, and unequal access to resources. Many schools still lack well-equipped laboratories, makerspaces, and adaptable classroom settings that allow for hands-on, project-based learning. Strengthening institutional capacity and ensuring equitable access to physical and digital infrastructure are key prerequisites for enabling meaningful interdisciplinary teaching and learning.

The Educator Competence Development and Resources domain focuses on the professional learning needs of educators, as well as their access to pedagogical tools and peer networks that support effective STEAM implementation. Across Europe, professional development opportunities remain fragmented, often short-term, and not tailored to interdisciplinary contexts. Limited collaboration with higher education and industry further restricts teachers’ exposure to current STEAM practices. Structured, sustained, and inclusive professional development, supported by open resources and communities of practice, is necessary to empower teachers as central agents of educational change.

Finally, the Collaboration Ecosystem domain highlights the persistent disconnect between formal education systems and real-world contexts, including labour markets, cultural sectors, and innovation ecosystems. Many educators lack opportunities or institutional mechanisms to engage with external partners, which limits students’ exposure to authentic, practice-based STEAM learning. Establishing long-term partnerships and cross-sector collaborations can strengthen relevance, innovation, and inclusion, ensuring that STEAM education remains responsive to societal and economic needs across Europe. The relative emphasis of each gap was established through triangulated qualitative analysis, drawing on survey responses, interviews, and policy mapping results. While the framework does not quantify frequency, recurring patterns across multiple stakeholder groups, particularly in areas of policy coherence, teacher professional development, and infrastructure, indicate that these challenges were consistently prioritised and widely recognised throughout the dataset.

3.2. Root Causes

Following the identification of the challenges and gaps in STEAM education, the next stage of the analysis focused on uncovering their underlying causes, corresponding to the second analytical point described in Section 2.3. This step was essential for moving beyond surface-level descriptions and developing a deeper understanding of the systemic factors shaping current conditions. The root cause analysis provided the foundation for designing targeted, scalable, and sustainable interventions that address not only the barriers themselves but also why they persist. The analysis situates these causes within a three-level structure, macro, meso, and micro, reflecting their interconnected nature.

At the macro level, root causes are linked to European and national strategies, governance mechanisms, and funding models. They include fragmented policy coordination, short-term project-based funding, limited monitoring and evaluation systems, and insufficient strategic alignment between education, innovation, and employment policies. These conditions contribute to conceptual fragmentation and hinder the sustainability of STEAM initiatives across Member States.

At the meso level, institutional and organisational barriers are evident. Common issues include rigid school timetables, limited financial and infrastructural resources, weak leadership support, and a lack of mechanisms for cross-sector collaboration. Together, these factors restrict opportunities for co-teaching, team planning, and hands-on learning, conditions necessary for effective STEAM implementation.

At the micro level, root causes relate to teachers’ daily practice, competences, and confidence. Educators often report low self-efficacy in designing interdisciplinary lessons, insufficient exposure to inquiry-based approaches, and limited access to continuous professional development and peer networks. Traditional assessment practices that prioritise memorisation over creativity, systems thinking, and collaboration further reinforce these challenges.

By examining these interrelated levels together, the analysis highlights how macro-level policy fragmentation cascades into institutional constraints and classroom realities, underscoring the need for coherent, multi-level strategies for change.

3.3. Enabling Conditions

This section corresponds to the third step of the analysis described in Section 2.3, focusing on the enabling factors that support the transition from identified challenges and root causes to systemic change. While the previous sections examined barriers and their origins, this stage identifies the cross-cutting conditions that must be in place for sustainable STEAM transformation. These enabling factors act as the connecting element in the logic chain, linking causes with potential actions and outcomes, and are relevant across macro, meso, and micro levels.

Strategic policy coherence and long-term planning are fundamental prerequisites for effective STEAM reform. Sustainable change depends on coherent national frameworks, cross-ministerial collaboration, and stable funding mechanisms that align with European policy objectives, such as those of the European Commission and the European Education Area. These efforts can help ensure stronger coordination between European and national initiatives, as well as greater stakeholder confidence in the long-term implementation.

Another key enabler is curricular flexibility and pedagogical autonomy. Rigid curricula and assessment systems frequently inhibit interdisciplinary teaching. Flexible curriculum guidelines, recognition of co-teaching, and assessment frameworks that value transversal competences may support local adaptation, experimentation, and learner-centred innovation.

Teacher empowerment and sustained professional development are equally critical. Data indicate the need for structured, ongoing CPD aligned with STEAM competences, supported by peer mentoring, co-design opportunities, and collaboration with teacher education institutions and industry partners. Such initiatives can enhance educators’ confidence, competence, and collaboration capacity.

At the institutional level, inclusive school cultures and supportive leadership create the environment necessary for innovation. Training school leaders in inclusive, interdisciplinary approaches and embedding STEAM goals into institutional development plans can foster a shared responsibility and promote continuous improvement.

Finally, cross-sectoral partnerships and community engagement represent a cornerstone of long-term impact. Systemic collaboration among schools, industry, and communities can strengthen the real-world relevance of STEAM learning, enrich resources, and enhance career awareness and opportunities. To ensure that these partnerships evolve and remain effective, monitoring, evaluation, and the effective use of data are essential. Developing meaningful indicators and feedback mechanisms allows policymakers and schools to assess progress and adjust strategies based on evidence.

3.4. STEAM Education Impact Analysis Matrix

Building on the previous analytical steps, this section introduces the STEAM Education Impact Analysis Matrix, which consolidates the findings into an integrated model of systemic change. As illustrated in Figure 1, the matrix is organised into four interrelated domains: Policy and Governance, Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure, Educator Competence Development and Resources, and Collaboration Ecosystem.

Each domain includes a logical sequence that connects identified challenges to root causes, relevant stakeholders, proposed actions, and measurable indicators. This structure provides a coherent overview of how evidence-based interventions can contribute to progress across different levels of the education system. The matrix thus functions as both a diagnostic tool, highlighting structural weaknesses, and a planning instrument that supports policymakers, institutions, and practitioners in aligning actions with intended outcomes. A detailed description of the corresponding indicators and examples of implementation mechanisms is provided in Appendix A. The main text focuses on presenting the overall structure and logic of the framework, allowing for a clear understanding of how challenges translate into targeted reforms and measurable change.

3.4.1. Domain: Policy and Governance

The analysis reveals that many Member States still lack a shared definition of STEAM, common curriculum standards or objectives, and coordinated mechanisms to integrate European initiatives, such as the Digital Education Action Plan, the European Education Area, GreenComp, and the STEM Education Strategic Plan, into national policy agendas. Other systemic issues include rigid school structures that restrict interdisciplinary approaches, limited coordination of EU-guided and national STEAM initiatives, the absence of common evaluation frameworks, insufficient evidence of impact at the policy level, and underdeveloped strategies for inclusion, gender equality, and accessibility. For example, schools may wish to strengthen STEAM education or to establish collaborations with other organisations. However, this is often not feasible due to the lack of collaboration opportunities and the rigidity of the school structures. In such cases, both educators and schools are discouraged from participating in STEAM initiatives.

Table 1. STEAM Impact Analysis Matrix for Policy and Governance Domain.

Cause	Stakeholders	Proposed Solution(s)	Suggested Action(s)	Impact Indicators
Gap 1: Lack of a common understanding of STEAM
Different national strategies, curricula and terminologies result in inconsistent interpretations and fragmented implementation of STEAM education across Europe.	Policymakers, curriculum designers, teacher educators, education agencies, teacher training institutions	- Development of EU-level guidelines and a shared competence-oriented curriculum framework - Integration of common principles into initial and continuing teacher training	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to co-design shared framework Curriculum Designers: Align national curricula with common principles Teacher Training Institutions: Integrate agreed definition and principles in professional development programmes Education Agencies: Promote dissemination and support the use of the shared framework through national initiatives, seminars, and platforms (e.g., Scientix)	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Policy and Infrastructure; Support
Gap 2: Need for common curriculum standards and guidelines—Establishment of STEAM Standards
Different national standards and curricula Lack of a common orientation or common aims	Policymakers, curriculum designers, teacher educators, Teacher training institutions, Agencies/Networks	- Development of EU-level theoretical background for STEAM education. - Continuing of funding efforts that promote STEAM education. - Enlist some STEAM Standards to fund or enhance STEAM education. - Development of an EU-level STEAM Curriculum. - Continuing and scaling funding efforts that promote the uptake and development of STEAM standards.	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to co-design shared guidelines and aims Curriculum Designers: Align or design national curricula with common standards and guidelines Teacher Training Institutions: Integrate STEAM Standards and guidelines in professional development programmes Agencies/Networks: Support dissemination and piloting at national and regional levels through EU-funded projects and initiatives	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Community Engagement and Partnerships; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact; Infrastructure Support; Resource Allocation
Gap 3: Rigid School Structures Limiting STEAM Implementation
National education systems maintain fixed, subject-based timetables that do not accommodate interdisciplinary approaches, extended project work, or teacher collaboration	Policymakers, curriculum designers, teacher educators, school leaders, teacher training institutions	- Changes in school structure and schedule - Enhance collaborations between different disciplines or teachers - Training and guidance for educators on how to structure interdisciplinary lessons within flexible timeframes	EU Commission/Ministries: Establishment of a more flexible school schedule that allows teachers to implement STEAM activities Curriculum Designers: National curricula should include and/or encourage STEAM activities as an integrated approach School leaders and Teacher Training Institutions: Design educational programmes that promote STEAM activities design processes and interdisciplinary approaches	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Community Engagement and Partnerships
Gap 4: Lack of Coordinated EU-Guided or National STEAM Initiatives
Despite increasing interest in STEAM education, there is limited coordination across Member States. Many schools operate without structured access to national or EU-level initiatives, leading to fragmented implementation, missed funding opportunities	Policymakers, teachers, School advisors	- Develop central initiatives that promote and disseminate STEAM education in Europe and National level - Strengthening of networks and partnerships that enable teacher participation, professional development, and access to resources	EU Commission/Ministries: Expand and promote strategic initiatives such as Scientix, STEM Discovery Campaigns, and STEAM-related Erasmus+ Key Action School advisors and national agencies: Disseminate information and actively support schools and teachers in engaging with EU-funded STEAM initiatives Teachers: Participate in EU and national campaigns, co-develop and implement activities, and share practices	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Community Engagement and Partnerships; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact
Gap 5: Lack of common Evaluation methods and STEAM learning objectives
Lack of appropriate and common assessment tools and evaluation frameworks for STEAM education.	Policymakers, curriculum designers, teacher educators	Developing tools that respond to real classroom environments, providing opportunities for teachers to reflect on and evaluate their learning with the aim of improving it.	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to co-design shared evaluation rubrics and methods Curriculum Designers: Include evaluation processes in national curricula Teacher Training Institutions: Design and Implement educational programmes about evaluation processes and methods	Changes in Teaching Practice; Professional Development; Programme Evaluation and Improvement
Gap 6: Absence of clear impact evidence at the policy level, in national and international STEAM initiatives
Lack of consistent mechanisms for monitoring, evaluating, and reporting the outcomes of STEAM-related initiatives across Europe	Policymakers, project coordinators, evaluation experts, education agencies	- Introduction of clear, measurable objectives and expected results for all STEAM initiatives at both EU and national levels - Monitoring the performance of STEAM initiatives at European and National Level	EU Commission/Ministries: Formulation of clear objectives and desired results for each funded project. Development of an evaluation and data collection rubric for each programme in order to capture and monitor the impact and outcome of each project Education Agencies and Project Coordinators: Collect and report impact data and case studies to support continuous improvement and evidence-based policy updates	Changes in Teaching Practice; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact Evaluation and Improvement
Gap 7: Limited Integration of Inclusion, gender equality and accessibility in STEAM Educational Policies and Practices
STEAM policies, curricula, and resources across Member States often lack targeted strategies to ensure inclusive participation, gender balance, and accessibility for all learners and educators.	Policymakers, curriculum designers, teacher educators, NGOs	- Embed inclusion, gender equality, and accessibility as cross-cutting priorities in all STEAM initiatives and curricula - Promote the systematic development and dissemination of inclusive teaching practices, gender-sensitive resources, and accessible tools	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for more research and cooperative projects about inclusion, diversity, gender equality to end gender and other types of stereotypes once for all. Promote repositories and initiatives about inclusive STEAM activities (e.g., SPICE Inclusive STEAM Alliance, STEAMEbrance, OUTSTEAM and STEAM Job profiles (STE(A)MIT). Enhancing the translation of the programme’s results into more languages and ensuring accessibility of the results (e.g., Scientix Repository). Curriculum Designers: Integrate guidelines, ideas, aims and lessons to promote gender equality through the curriculum Teacher Training Institutions: Develop teacher training programmes to include gender equality and inclusion. Highlight women and other underrepresented social groups’ STEAM opportunities and careers. Advocacy and Community Organisations: Collaborate on school-community partnerships and awareness campaigns to increase inclusive engagement in STEAM	Changes in Teaching Practice; Attitudes towards STEAM; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Community Engagement; Social Impact; Resource Allocation

presents the Policy and Governance domain of the Impact Framework in full, illustrating how each identified challenge is connected to a complete logic chain from evidence to measurable outcomes.

3.4.2. Domain: Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure

The second domain of the Impact Analysis Matrix focuses on Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure, encompassing the organisational, physical, and digital environments in which STEAM education takes place. While policy frameworks provide strategic direction, schools and universities are where implementation occurs, and where enabling or constraining factors most tangibly influence teaching and learning. Across Europe, institutional barriers persist in hindering the delivery of inclusive and high-quality STEAM education. Many schools lack adequately equipped laboratories, makerspaces, and adaptable classrooms that support experimentation and collaboration. Limited funding, uneven resource allocation, and administrative rigidity often amplify disparities, especially in rural or under-resourced regions.

Additionally, inflexible timetables and high student–to–teacher ratios limit opportunities for interdisciplinary teaching and peer collaboration. For instance, a school aiming to introduce robotics or sustainability projects may face challenges due to the absence of suitable lab space, limited technical equipment, or insufficient time for teachers to collaborate on planning.

The Impact Matrix (

Table 2. STEAM Impact Analysis Matrix for Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure Domain.

Cause	Stakeholders	Proposed Solution(s)	Suggested Action(s)	Impact Indicators
Gap 8: Insufficient or Inadequate STEAM Facilities and Infrastructure in Schools
Many schools across Europe lack access to appropriate learning environments, such as well-equipped laboratories, makerspaces, and flexible classrooms that support modern STEAM methodologies.	Policymakers, curriculum designers Heads of Schools, Schools’ advisors, Teacher educators Teachers, industry	- Increase funding opportunities and policy support for research and educational programmes. - Courses offered during their official training set up and utilise appropriate facilities. - Seminars and training about modern equipment and technology. - Collaboration with industry to improve and utilise existing facilities.	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for schools to set up and/or improve the existing facilities and infrastructures. (e.g., teachers visit and learn about the Future Classroom Lab in Brussels) Curriculum Designers: Design and develop guidelines/ideas for teachers to design their own facilities, classrooms or laboratories. Record the minimum requirements for an effective learning space. Offer alternative options, even without the need for digital tools. Heads of Schools and Schools’ Advisors: Promote collaboration between teachers to design, develop, and utilise their learning space. Financial management for resources. Enhance teacher’s participation in funding opportunities and competitions (e.g., Erasmus+, Scientix) Teacher Training Institutions: Courses could focus on how to design, implement and utilise schools’ facilities. Teachers: Attend courses, seminars and workshops offered by European initiatives to strengthen and update their knowledge. Examples such as Future Classroom Lab to get inspired and update their knowledge. Attend seminars about modern educational technology. Industry: Promote collaborations between schools and industry. Provide schools with access and training in modern technology. Offer qualified staff to inspire and mentor teachers and students. Funding opportunities for school labs, facilities and technology equipment.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development Critical thinking; Problem-solving Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Resource Allocation; Policy and Infrastructure Support
Gap 9: Insufficient Financial Support for STEAM Equipment and Resources
Many schools lack access to the financial resources needed to purchase and maintain appropriate STEAM equipment, tools, and infrastructure.	Policymakers, Heads of Schools, Schools’ advisors, Teachers, industry	- Expand financial support mechanisms to ensure equitable access to STEAM tools and infrastructure - Simplify the administrative processes for accessing EU and national funding (e.g., Erasmus+). - Foster school–industry partnerships that offer sponsorships, joint research, and shared use of equipment	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for schools without excessive bureaucracy. A specific call for schools that have not been funded or support for schools to develop proposals in partnership with other organisations. Heads of Schools, Schools’ advisors and Teachers: Develop research and educational proposals to participate in funded projects. Collaboration with universities and other organisations in funded partnerships. Development of initiatives for participation in competitions, educational and research projects at local, national and European level. Industry: Funding opportunities for equipment or teacher training. Internship or scholarship opportunities for students. Strengthening cooperation with schools to develop research projects.	Professional Development; STEAM Literacy; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Resource Allocation; Policy and Infrastructure Support
Gap 10: Limited integration of Modern Educational Technology in Schools
Insufficient or inappropriate equipment in schools and inadequate training of teachers	Policymakers, Curriculum Designers, Teacher educators, Heads of Schools, Schools’ advisors, Teachers, industry	- Expand funding and policy support for upgrading school technology and ensuring equitable access to digital tools - Professional development seminars in the context of key actions at national and European level to provide teachers with access to and training in the use of modern educational technology	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for schools to buy and/or update the existing educational technology of the schools. Support teacher visits to innovative learning environments such as the Future Classroom Lab (FCL), teacher academies mobilities exchanges. Curriculum Designers: Integrate and update the existing curricula with guidelines and suggestions of how and which educational and emerging technologies are appropriate for schools. Development of lesson plans and practical applications of the new technologies. Heads of Schools and Schools’ Advisors: Organising seminars and training of teachers on issues related to new technologies. Continuous updating and improvement of the technological devices available in the school. Continuous training on effective uses and good practices. Teacher Training Institutions: Strengthening and emphasising courses that focus on the educational use of new technologies and that promote STEAM education. Preparing future teachers on new technologies and educational design. Teachers: Attend courses, seminars and workshops offered by European initiatives to strengthen and update their knowledge. Attend seminars about modern educational technology and exchange practices with their colleagues. Industry: Offer opportunities for teacher professional development and training. Offer access to new technologies in real-world settings. Funding opportunities to equip schools with new technological equipment. Continuous and close cooperation with schools to update their knowledge about new technologies, their applications and the advantages they offer in order to be successfully integrated into the classroom.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; STEAM Literacy; student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact
Gap 11: Limited Time and Structural Support for Teacher Collaboration and STEAM Course Implementation
Teachers often lack dedicated time within the school schedule for collaborative planning, interdisciplinary teaching, or joint implementation of STEAM activities. In many cases, existing timetables and curricula are too rigid to accommodate innovative and collaborative teaching approaches.	Policymakers, Curriculum Designers, Teacher educators, Heads of Schools, Schools’ advisors, Teachers	- Introduce flexible curriculum structures and schedules to allow for teacher collaboration and STEAM activity planning - Integrate collaborative instructional design and interdisciplinary teaching into school practices - Support professional development on collaboration models, time management, and co-teaching strategies	EU Commission/Ministries: Develop and establish an EU-level framework about STEAM that enhances collaboration and offers ideas and ready-to-implement STEAM activities. Encourage national education policies to allocate time specifically for collaborative planning and cross-subject integration Curriculum Designers: Integrate and update existing curricula with guidelines and suggestions on how teachers could use STEAM courses to work together. Enhancing the approach of teaching individual courses as a whole through STEAM training. Provision for ensuring the time required to teach courses through teacher collaboration. Heads of Schools and Schools’ Advisors: Organisation of seminars and training of teachers on issues related to collaborative design and implementation. Training on the options and opportunities available to teachers regarding time management in the school environment. Ensuring that the school administration has a flexible programme that is adaptable and reinforces STEAM teaching regardless of the time needed for implementation, through a supportive environment. Teacher Training Institutions: Offer courses that reinforce instructional design and ensure appropriate preparation for collaboration and time management in classroom settings. Teachers: Be active and receptive to collaboration in both educational planning and implementation with fellow teachers. Manage time in a flexible and effective way. Seeking training in new trends and teaching methods.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication
Gap 12: High Student-to-teacher ratios
High number of children in the classroom causing difficulty in managing and implementing demanding STEAM projects and programmes	Policymakers, school leaders, curriculum planners	- Class sizes could be reviewed in terms of the number of students, so that students have more opportunities for STEAM education and teachers are able to respond in the best possible way. - Explore models for group-based teaching, co-teaching, or classroom support staff to better manage larger groups when reduction is not feasible	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to investigate the ideal number of students per class, taking into account the classroom dimensions and any educational requirements to ensure successful learning. Recommend EU-level policy guidance or benchmarks for class sizes that support inclusive and high-quality education National and Regional Education Authorities: Adjust staffing allocations and school infrastructure policies based on STEAM need. Explore flexible classroom models or co-teaching practices to enhance instructional capacity. School Leaders: Advocate for policy changes where needed and implement local solutions (e.g., team teaching, split groups) when resources allow.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication

) captures such examples by tracing each challenge to its underlying cause, the relevant stakeholders involved, and the corresponding actions. It also includes indicators such as improvements in teacher collaboration, infrastructure investment, and student engagement, illustrating how the framework can be used to monitor systemic progress over time.

3.4.3. Educator Competence Development and Resources

The third domain of the Impact Analysis Matrix highlights that teachers are the key drivers of meaningful change in STEAM education. No policy or infrastructure investment can succeed without educators who are confident, well-supported, and equipped to implement interdisciplinary and inclusive practices. The analysis reveals that many teachers are eager to innovate, but they face persistent structural and professional barriers. Gaps in both initial and continuous teacher education limit their ability to integrate STEAM approaches effectively. Continuous Professional Development (CPD) opportunities are often fragmented, short-term, or generic, offering little focus on interdisciplinary teaching, design-based learning, or digital and sustainability competences. Teachers also report challenges in accessing quality-assured, ready-to-use teaching materials and in connecting theoretical knowledge to real-world contexts. Furthermore, peer learning and mentoring structures, such as Communities of Practice, remain limited and unsystematic, which reduces opportunities for collaboration and professional growth.

For instance, a teacher aiming to combine mathematics, art, and coding into a robotics project may lack not only the necessary resources but also the peer and institutional support to sustain such an initiative. This example illustrates the close interdependence between competence development and access to pedagogical tools.

The Impact Matrix (

Table 3. STEAM Impact Analysis Matrix for Educator Competence Development and Resources Domain.

Cause	Stakeholders	Proposed Solution(s)	Suggested Action(s)	Impact Indicators
Gap 13: Limited access to Ready-to-Use STEAM Educational Resources and Tools
Teachers often face challenges in locating or adapting high-quality, ready-to-implement lesson plans, tutorials, digital tools, and methodologies for STEAM education	Policymakers, Teacher educators, Teachers	- Development and/or dissemination of existing platforms-databases at the EU and national levels with access to curated, quality-assured, and multilingual STEAM resources. - Encourage the active contribution and sharing of resources by educators and education stakeholders - Support training and mentoring to ensure that teachers can adapt and implement these tools effectively	EU Commission/Ministries: Develop and establish an EU-level STEAM platform with lesson plans, tools, and ready-to-implement STEAM activities. Support and actively engage teachers during the design of these platforms, while encouraging them to disseminate the outcomes in the educational community. Teacher Training Institutions: Develop STEAM platforms and databases incorporating design techniques and methods, as well as lesson plans and ideas, for pre-service and in-service teachers. Teachers: Use curated EU and national repositories (e.g., Scientix, project platforms) to source quality-assured STEAM lesson plans, OER, and datasets; adopt recommended instructional design models. Disseminate the platforms and their outcomes to their colleagues’ community. Industry: Collaborate to design and share technologically enhanced STEAM resources that reflect real-world challenges. Ensure accessibility of these tools for schools through licencing, open access, or partnerships	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development
Gap 14: Lack of clear design and Instructional Strategies for STEAM Implementation
Teachers lack structured, easy-to-apply methodologies for planning, delivering, and evaluating STEAM lessons.	Policymakers, Curriculum Designers, Teacher educators, Teachers, Industry	- Promote strategies for planning and improving teachers’ lessons. - Provide easy and understandable ways for teachers to design, implement, and improve their lessons (e.g., Engineering Design Process and corresponding template) - Support collaboration between educators and industry to connect school-based design with real-world applications	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for research about Design and instructional strategies. Develop and suggest tested design methods and techniques. Coordinate training and lessons for teachers about sufficient design and instructional strategies. Curriculum Designers: Integrate and update existing curricula with design processes such as the Engineering Design Process and Design Thinking. Develop or suggest specific templates that facilitate teachers’ design and instructional process. Teacher Training Institutions: Research and develop design and instructional guidelines for pre-service and in-service teachers. Organise seminars and training courses about design processes. Teachers: Implement and Test various design and instructional strategies. Explore and integrate strategies that are suggested by EU research programmes that offer free resources and research data. Sharing experiences and practices regarding design and instructional practices. Industry: Connecting design processes from workspace to school. Enhance connections between school and applied knowledge. Connections with real-world challenges.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development
Gap 15: Insufficient Content and Science Understanding among teachers
Shortage of qualified science teachers Inadequate emphasis on science teaching in undergraduate teacher education Industry feedback indicates that students often lack a solid foundation in basic science	Teacher educators, Teachers, Industry	- Strengthen science education within undergraduate and initial teacher training programmes - Promote continuous professional development (CPD) focused on science pedagogy and practical applications - Foster industry-education collaboration to align science competences with labour market needs	Teacher Training Institutions: Universities should provide adequate competences (knowledge, skills and attitudes) towards science. Enhance practical applications during teachers’ studies. Promote the continuous professional development of teachers Teachers: Participation in continuous professional development. Attending targeted seminars and classroom tests in real-classroom conditions. Industry: Strengthening cooperation between industry and the school community to develop the key competences needed for the labour market. Opportunities to link basic science knowledge to work through internships and scholarships.	STEAM Literacy
Gap 16: Limited Availability of STEAM Communities Across the Educational Ecosystem
STEAM communities are not formally established, or are not widely accessible to educators Lack of structured opportunities for peer collaboration, mentoring, and exchange of practices	Policymakers, Teacher educators, Schools’ advisors, Teachers	Forming formal STEAM working groups, networks, and CoPs at local, national or EU-wide levels under the supervision of educational advisors, universities, and research partnerships	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for research partnerships aiming to create and sustain STEAM communities Teacher Training Institutions: Universities could organise and facilitate STEAM communities by utilising their alumni, pre-service and in-service teachers. School Advisors and Teachers: Participation in continuous professional development. Organisation of the STEAM community at the school, national, and European levels. Collaborate with colleagues and disseminate their ideas and outcomes.	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development
Gap 17: Lack of centrally organised and structured CPD for STEAM Education
Absence of coordinated, sustained CPD opportunities across countries CPD programmes often lack focus on STEAM-specific methodologies, tools, and interdisciplinary approaches Limited collaboration between educational institutions and industry in teacher training	Policymakers, Teacher educators, Teachers, Industry	Establishing systematic and structured Continuous Professional Development programmes that respond to the needs and challenges faced by teachers in planning and implementing STEAM activities	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to co-design a shared policy on Continuous Professional Development and Teacher Education about STEAM Teacher Training Institutions: Design and offer courses for pre-service and in-service teachers about STEAM Teachers: Participation in continuous professional development. Participation of pre-service teachers in industry-related seminars and career opportunities. Industry: Professional development opportunities for teachers through industry-schools partnerships. Establishing partnerships and internships for pre-service teachers	Changes in Teaching Practice; Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards; STEAM Collaboration Communication

) captures these dynamics by linking each identified gap to its underlying causes, key stakeholders, and targeted interventions. It proposes actions such as embedding STEAM competences into teacher education programmes, expanding structured CPD provision, and creating shared repositories of teaching resources. The corresponding indicators enable policymakers and institutions to monitor progress through improvements in teacher confidence, collaboration, and the quality of classroom implementation.

3.4.4. Domain: Collaboration Ecosystem

The fourth domain links STEAM education with industry, research, and real-world contexts. While many schools across Europe have made efforts to introduce workplace relevance into their teaching, findings show that these connections often remain limited, ad hoc, and overly dependent on individual teacher initiatives rather than being embedded within national strategies or school structures. The gap between classroom learning and real-life application is one of the most persistent systemic barriers to delivering meaningful, competence-based STEAM education. Too often, curricula emphasise theoretical knowledge without offering sufficient opportunities for students to engage with authentic challenges, industry-standard tools, or professional role models. This disconnect not only weakens student engagement and motivation but also limits their understanding of the diverse career pathways that STEAM fields can offer.

Across the data sources, several interrelated challenges emerged: weak partnerships between schools and industry, minimal exposure of students to STEAM professions, outdated curricula misaligned with current labour market needs, and a lack of structured opportunities for educators to interact with real-world practices. In many cases, teachers reported limited access to practically applicable resources or professional development activities that would enable them to integrate workplace contexts into their lessons. At the same time, industry stakeholders highlighted missed opportunities for co-developing curricula, offering internships, and shaping competences that are directly relevant to the future workforce. For example, a secondary school may run an occasional STEAM career day, but without sustained collaboration with local companies, universities, and research centres, students’ exposure to professional STEAM contexts remains superficial. Similarly, while some EU projects, such as “STE(A)MIT”, have created job profile platforms, these resources are not yet universally adopted or systematically integrated into school programmes.

The Impact Matrix (

Table 4. STEAM Impact Analysis Matrix for Collaboration Ecosystem Domain.

Cause	Stakeholders	Proposed Solution(s)	Suggested Action(s)	Impact Indicators
Gap 18: Insufficient integration of real-world contexts and competences in STEAM education
Disconnection between classroom content and real-life challenges Limited collaboration between schools, universities, and industry Lack of practical experiences that link theory to application	Policymakers, Curriculum Designers Teacher educators, Teachers, Industry	- Strengthen the connection between STEAM education and real-world challenges by promoting interdisciplinary projects, work-based learning, and partnerships - Linking courses at the University with real life - Establish research and innovation partnerships between educational institutions and industry	EU Commission/Ministries: Fund opportunities to strengthen partnerships between educational organisations and industry in order to make STEAM education responsive to real challenges and STEAM competences (knowledge, skills, attitudes) applicable and adaptive. Curriculum Designers: Revision of curricula in order to link STEAM competences with the real world, the challenges of everyday life in order to make STEAM education meaningful for students and teachers who teach. Teacher Training Institutions: Research partnerships linking Industry with prospective teachers. Field research opportunities, real-world work environment, and connecting school STEAM competencies to workplace needs. Teachers: Linking school knowledge with real-world applications. Providing opportunities for students to discover by themselves the connection between knowledge and everyday life. Industry: Strengthening cooperation and dialogue between educational institutions and Industry. Updating the required STEAM competences needed in the workplace. Providing equipment or funding to schools from industry to put knowledge into practice. Opportunities for students to visit industry. Internship opportunities.	Changes in Teaching Practice Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers Community. Engagement and Partnerships; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact
Gap 19: Limited cooperation between educators and industry in STEAM education
Weak links between schools and industry Lack of structured opportunities for teachers to engage with real-world practices Limited access to industry-driven professional development and practically oriented teaching resources	Policymakers, Teachers, Industry	Strengthening partnerships through scholarships, sponsorships, visits in order for teachers, initially, to gain familiarity and connection with Industry Promote teacher professional development programmes that focus on real-world applications and technological advances Enable teachers to design and implement STEAM programs that reflect workplace needs and practices	EU Commission/Ministries: Funding opportunities for research and educational programs between schools and industry. Strengthening the connection at local level, using industry close to schools, and then connecting at national and European level. Teachers: Linking their design and teaching to industry. Enhance industry visits and training opportunities on practical applications, modern technology and tools. Industry: Designing relevant professional development programmes for STEAM and emerging technologies. Strengthening relationships between teachers and industry through professional development programmes offered by industry. Allocation of the workplace for teaching in real working conditions	Changes in Teaching Practice Confidence in STEAM instruction; Professional Development; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers; Community Engagement and Partnerships; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact
Gap 20: Limited exposure to STEAM professions and lack of role models or concrete career pathways
Insufficient integration of real-world STEAM career examples in the classroom Lack of systematic interaction between students and professionals from STEAM fields Absence of centralised resources to explore STEAM-related professions	Policymakers, Teachers, Industry	Introducing STEAM career pathways. Visits of experts to schools to present their professions. Development of STEAM job platform	EU Commission/Ministries: funding opportunities to develop and enrich a web platform with STEAM job profiles (e.g., “STE(A)MIT” project) Teachers: Utilising STEAM jobs platforms in order to be able to introduce STEAM jobs to students. Exploitation examples of people who have pursued a career in STEAM. Highlighting historical personalities who have contributed to the development of STEAM. Focus on STEAM women’s careers Industry: Strengthening expert visits to schools. Publication of experts’ CVs through STEAM Jobs platforms	Attitudes towards STEAM; Increased Interest in STEAM Careers
Gap 21: Lack of alignment between education systems, policy agendas, and industry skill demands
Weak collaboration between schools, policymakers, and industry Outdated curricula not reflecting current and future labour market needs Insufficient awareness of the specific STEAM skills required in the workplace	Policymakers, Curriculum Designers Teachers, Industry	- Promote joint research and consultation between schools, policymakers, and industry to define the most relevant STEAM competences. - Review curricula to achieve this connection. - Strengthen and disseminate STEAM trainings that promote these competences.	EU Commission/Ministries: Set up an expert working group to explore the critical STEAM competences that schools need to foster in order for students to be able to successfully meet the challenges of modern life and the labour market. Organising conferences and establishing open channels of communication among schools, policymakers, and Industry for the development of a comprehensive education policy. Curriculum Designers: Update school curricula based on the identified competences and ensure alignment with current job market trends. Teachers: Strengthening the skills that seem to be most crucial to students. Promote the linking of school skills with industry skills. Providing opportunities for practical application of STEAM skills in industry Industry: Updating the required STEAM competences needed in the workplace. Organising seminars and courses for students that cultivate and enhance the desired STEAM skills. Strengthening school-industry relations through systematic cooperation, connection to the real world and provision of equipment, and cooperation with specialised experts. Opportunities for students to visit industry. Internship opportunities.	Critical thinking; Problem-solving; Creativity; STEAM Literacy; Student engagement and interest; Self-Efficacy; Attitudes towards STEAM; Collaboration; Communication; Community Engagement and Partnerships; Contribution to Innovation and Creativity; Economic Impact; Social Impact

) for this domain brings together the identified gaps and root causes, along with proposals for strengthening the collaboration ecosystem. Suggested actions include developing long-term school–industry partnerships, embedding real-world competences into curricula, establishing accessible career platforms, and aligning education systems more closely with labour market needs. Together, these measures provide a structured basis for policymakers, educators, and industry actors to co-create meaningful and sustainable collaboration models.

4. Discussion and Implications

This study contributes to ongoing efforts to strengthen science and STEAM education by proposing a structured and action-oriented Impact Framework that bridges empirical evidence with systemic policy and practice reform. While the challenges identified, such as fragmented governance, limited teacher training, and weak school–industry collaboration, are not new, the innovation of this work lies in its ability to connect these longstanding issues within a coherent, multi-level logic chain that links root causes to actionable and measurable solutions. In doing so, this study builds on and extends the legacy of major European reform initiatives such as Science Education Now: A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future of Europe (Rocard et al., 2007) and Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections (Osborne & Dillon, 2008), which highlighted the urgent need to renew science teaching through inquiry-based pedagogy, strengthen teacher professional development, and promote greater policy coherence across Member States. It further aligns with recent European policy developments that emphasise interdisciplinarity, competence-based learning, and inclusion—principles that underpin current strategic priorities, including the STEM Education Strategic Plan (European Commission, 2025), the Education and Training Monitor (European Commission, 2024), and the JRC Guide on STEM and STEAM Integration (Mazzeo-Ortolani, 2025). Complementary research by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (Pokropek, 2024) and recent frameworks (Carter et al., 2021; Chappell et al., 2025) highlight similar priorities: connecting policy and pedagogy through innovation, interdisciplinarity, and teacher empowerment.

Beyond policy, the need for inclusive and socially responsive STEAM learning environments has been well documented (Milanovic et al., 2023; Nyaaba et al., 2024; Spyropoulou et al., 2024). Studies continue to reveal persistent gender imbalances and barriers for students with disabilities (Meoli et al., 2024; Charlesworth & Banaji, 2019; Kricorian et al., 2020; Ariza & Hernández Hernández, 2025; Andrés et al., 2025). By integrating these strands, the Impact Framework extends previous reform calls by providing a systemic and measurable model that links policy intent with implementation mechanisms and evaluation processes. It thus contributes to bridging a long-standing gap between research-based recommendations and the operational realities of European education systems. In addition, by embedding stakeholder perspectives, it also reflects a bottom-up understanding of gaps and priorities, translating these into a shared framework for coordinated action at all levels.

4.1. Urgent and Cross-Cutting Priorities

The analysis highlights three priority domains requiring immediate action:

• Policy Coherence and Shared Frameworks: The absence of a common definition and coherent curriculum standards continues to fragment STEAM implementation across Europe. Addressing this gap is urgent because it underpins all other challenges. A shared European framework, anchored in competence development and inclusive design, would facilitate alignment between policy, teacher education, and classroom practice (Mazzeo-Ortolani, 2025).
• Teacher Empowerment and Professional Learning: Evidence shows that teachers remain the most critical agents of change, yet they often operate without structured professional pathways or adequate resources (Chappell et al., 2025; Spyropoulou et al., 2025). Immediate investment in national and regional continuous professional development (CPD), coupled with collaborative models such as Communities of Practice, can accelerate change within existing systems (Spyropoulou & Kameas, 2024).
• Institutional Conditions and Infrastructure: Many schools still lack modern laboratories, flexible timetables, or resources necessary for project-based learning (Milanovic et al., 2023). Investment in equitable access to infrastructure—both physical and digital—must accompany pedagogical reform, as technical capacity directly influences teacher innovation and student engagement.
• Collaboration Ecosystem: Collaboration with industry, education and research institutions remains weak and uneven, despite its proven impact on relevance and learner engagement (Watters et al., 2016; Allina, 2018). Embedding partnerships into school structures, rather than treating them as project-based add-ons, can make STEAM learning more authentic and sustainable.

These priority areas interact dynamically: policy coherence sets the conditions, educator support enables implementation, and real-world collaboration sustains innovation. Addressing them simultaneously can yield greater system-wide efficiency than tackling them in isolation.

4.2. Implications for Practice and Policy

At a conceptual level, the Impact Framework provides a novel structure for understanding STEAM reform as a multi-level ecosystem rather than a sequence of isolated interventions. It translates the complexity of educational change into a usable model that articulates causal pathways from evidence to impact. The logic chain approach, linking gaps, causes, actions, benefits, and indicators, provides both diagnostic and planning value. This systematic approach distinguishes the framework from previous mapping or policy reviews by offering a direct bridge between research and actionable policy.

Practically, the framework’s design enables adaptation at multiple levels:

• At the policy level, it can inform the revision of national strategies, ensuring alignment with European initiatives such as the STEM Education Strategic Plan (European Commission, 2025).
• At the institutional level, schools and universities can apply it to prioritise reforms in leadership, timetabling, and infrastructure that facilitate interdisciplinary work.
• At the educator level, it provides a reference for aligning CPD, curriculum design, and classroom implementation with broader systemic goals.
• At the industry level, it supports the design of sustainable partnerships that extend learning beyond the classroom, fostering innovation and employability skills.

4.3. Towards Scalable and Sustainable Change

The findings highlight the need for immediate and coordinated action across all levels of the education system. At the European level, expert working groups could support the harmonisation of frameworks and assessment tools. At the national level, ministries could use the framework to identify structural bottlenecks and monitor policy coherence. At the institutional level, leadership development, flexible timetabling, and equitable resource allocation are essential. At the classroom level, teachers must be equipped to design interdisciplinary, inclusive, and inquiry-driven learning experiences that foster student engagement and learning.

In essence, the Impact Framework offers both a conceptual lens and a practical roadmap for future reform. It does not claim to solve persistent challenges overnight, but it provides a structured, evidence-informed mechanism to connect policy ambition with educational reality. By translating stakeholder insights into a common language of action and impact, it enables countries, institutions, and educators to move from fragmented experimentation to strategic, system-wide transformation.

5. Limitations and Next Steps

While the Impact Framework offers a comprehensive and evidence-based approach to driving systemic change in STEAM education, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the work was developed as part of the The SEER project, drawing on data collected through its defined scope, time frame, and stakeholder networks. As such, the representation of some countries, regions, or demographic groups may be uneven, and the findings reflect the contexts and priorities captured during the project’s lifecycle. Nevertheless, this represents a first attempt to consolidate diverse strands of evidence, policy analysis, stakeholder consultation, and practitioner perspectives into a single, coherent framework that spans macro, meso, and micro levels. In doing so, it provides a foundation for further refinement and validation. Second, while the framework identifies measurable indicators, these have yet to be tested to assess their predictive validity and practical applicability across diverse educational contexts.

It should also be noted that the framework was developed within a European policy context, shaped by agendas such as the European Education Area and the Digital Education Action Plan. These priorities may reflect a competence-based, innovation-oriented ideology consistent with EU strategies. Additionally, while the framework recommends greater coherence and shared standards in STEAM education, it is important to acknowledge that curriculum traditions across Europe vary significantly. Some national curricula are prescriptive and detailed, whereas others are open and outcome-based, granting teachers greater autonomy. These structural and cultural differences are deeply rooted and not easily harmonised. As such, future adaptation of the framework should remain sensitive to national curriculum philosophies, balancing standardisation with local flexibility and professional discretion.

Future applications should therefore test the framework’s adaptability across different cultural and policy contexts to ensure inclusivity and global relevance. Future research should pilot and refine the framework across various settings, assess the validity of indicators, and further explore the mechanisms that support sustained collaboration among education, policy, and industry.

6. Conclusions

This study developed and presented the Impact Analysis Framework as a practical, evidence-based tool to support the systemic transformation of STEAM education in Europe. Grounded in triangulated data from educators, policymakers, industry stakeholders, and comprehensive policy and practice mapping, the Framework connects identified gaps and root causes to targeted stakeholder actions, anticipated benefits, and measurable indicators. Its multi-level design, spanning macro, meso, and micro dimensions, ensures that recommendations address both structural reform and the day-to-day realities of teaching and learning. Within this structure, the Impact Analysis Matrix serves as the operational component of the Framework, translating its conceptual model into a practical tool that visually maps the relationships between challenges, causes, actions, and indicators. Together, the Framework and the Matrix provide a coherent mechanism for aligning evidence, policy, and practice.

The value of this approach lies in its ability to bridge strategy and implementation, offering policymakers a roadmap for coherent reform, curriculum designers clear guidance for aligning content with real-world competences, and educators actionable pathways for enhancing pedagogy and professional growth. By emphasising shared definitions, robust infrastructure, inclusive practices, and industry engagement, the Framework directly addresses stakeholder-identified needs and aligns with EU education priorities such as the Digital Education Action Plan, the European Education Area, and the STEM Education Strategic Plan.

Ultimately, achieving meaningful and sustainable change in STEAM education will require coordinated action across all levels of the system, supported by continuous monitoring and adaptive learning. The STEAM Impact Framework provides a foundation for such action, linking evidence to strategy, and strategy to impact, while inviting further research and collaboration to refine, adapt, and scale its use. Through this approach, STEAM education can evolve from a collection of isolated initiatives into a coherent, inclusive, and future-oriented component of European education systems.