The Impact of a Science Center Student Lab Project on Subject Attitudes Toward STEM Subjects and Career Choices in STEM Fields

Abstract

This research examines the impact of the project ‘Development of Science Experiential Education Programs and Science Experiential Centres’, implemented by the Mobilis Science Center in Győr between 2017 and 2021. The professional and societal relevance of the program and research lies in the growing importance of STEM disciplines and careers worldwide in recent decades, ensuring a long-term supply of skilled workers. A vital tool for this is the development of curricula that meet the needs of the 21st century, as well as the innovation of teaching methods in science subjects. The research involves a review of the literature on experiential science teaching and subject attitudes, the role of science centers, and relevant project documents. The present research, involving 592 students, focused on attitudes toward technology and science, openness to STEM careers, and the experiences and memories of participants in the student lab theme days. The results of the statistical data analyses confirm the effectiveness of the experiential education methods used in the theme day sessions, as the students’ openness to STEM careers is higher for those who participated in the sessions compared to the non-participants. There are significant differences in the attitudes of girls and boys participating in the program toward science subjects. The results suggest that the success in stimulating interest in science was mainly due to the experiential nature of the sessions. Moreover, the research found that the project led to the strengthening of the participants’ personal and social skills. This study is the first to look at the impact of the project. The results shed light on how teaching STEM subjects using experiential pedagogical methods can contribute to the long-term effectiveness of Széchenyi István University’s enrollment efforts and lead to the economic success of companies in a region facing a significant labor shortage in STEM careers.

1. Introduction

The global economy and labor market are changing at an extraordinary pace, characterized by the advancement of STEM fields and the rapid adoption of digitalization and artificial intelligence. More broadly, the rise in the knowledge economy makes human knowledge and 21st-century skills particularly relevant in our modern world. Science centers, which present technical and natural sciences playfully by providing an experience-based learning environment, play a key role in stimulating and deepening interest in technical and scientific studies, presenting science and modern technologies in an accessible way, developing the general knowledge capital of a region in a broader sense, and developing the basic scientific literacy needed to understand and process world events. See, for example, science centers such as London’s Science Museum, Finland’s Heureka, and Belgium’s Technopolis (Short & Weis, 2013; Falk et al., 2016).

The primary role of science centers today is to apply and develop experiential learning methods to support public education more effectively (Friedman, 2010; Hatch, 2018). Science centers can provide specialized support for public education, including the professional development of teachers and shaping their attitudes toward innovative teaching methods in STEM subjects (Hatch, 2018), the application of experimental teaching methods based on the active involvement of students, and the development of a complex approach that goes beyond rigid subject frameworks (Rákosi & Dőry, 2021).

Since the first decade of the 21st century, there has been a call for reform in science education in Europe (Rocard et al., 2007). The overly theoretical nature of STEM subjects and the large amount of course material lacking experimental support for comprehension make it difficult for students to absorb scientific knowledge. Therefore, integrating experiential pedagogical methods through experiential learning, which is “learning from experience or learning by doing” (Lewis & Williams, 1994, p. 5), in science education is hoped to be a good solution to the challenges in teaching STEM subjects. Numerous studies have highlighted the value of such approaches. Gama and Fernández (2009) reported on the positive impacts of an experiential education program for students in the K–12 range. Playfoot et al. (2017) introduced the NEWTON project, a digitally focused STEM initiative incorporating gamification, personalization, and social interaction to enhance learning. McCarthy (2018) explored how experiential strategies improved hands-on science learning in a five-year STEM partnership, and Nguyen and Ngo (2021) focused on designing activities to build core skills in primary students through STEM-oriented experiential learning. Building on these insights, the effective implementation of experiential learning requires a practice-oriented, context-based curriculum development, which would provide opportunities for active learning through experiential pedagogical methods (observation, investigation, self-experience) in teacher- and student-led experiments. In addition, integrating playful lessons outside the classroom into the learning process and teaching classes with a multidisciplinary approach are considered important (Angyal, 2020).

In 2017, the Hungarian government launched a call for proposals for the development of experiential science education programs and the provision of infrastructure for their implementation, which would contribute to the promotion of science subjects and the dissemination of modern experiential education, with the aim of making science and technology careers more popular. Within the framework of the EFOP-3.3.6-17 project, new science experience centers were established in 13 Hungarian cities, including Győr, where the Mobilis Science Center was given a new function through the development of a student lab. Other Hungarian science centers include Futura Science Center in Mosonmagyaróvár, Agora Science Center in Debrecen, Laboratory Magic Space in Pécs, and the Palace of Wonders in Budapest, just to name a few.

This paper explains the role and impact of science centers with a particular focus on the Mobilis Student Lab Project. It then introduces the increasingly emphasized experiential pedagogy in STEM education, highlighting state-of-the-art science teaching and relevant research on students’ attitudes toward STEM subjects in Europe and Hungary. The following sections of the paper highlight the impact of science centers on STEM education.

The research is aimed at assessing how the ‘off-site’ science activities, such as the Mobilis theme days, have shaped the attitudes of the participating pupils toward science and science careers, what kind of memories students have of the sessions a few years later, and how the theme days have contributed to the development of the participants’ social skills. The research hypotheses were built around four statements:

• Student lab theme days had a more positive impact on the STEM subject attitudes of students who participated in them for longer than two years compared to those who participated in them for up to two years.
• Students who participated in the student lab theme days are more open to STEM careers than students in the control group who did not participate in the program.
• The memory of the student lab theme days remains with students even after several years; they can recall the environment and atmosphere of the sessions more than the subject content.
• In addition to science education for young learners, the activities of the student lab theme days have also led to the strengthening of personal and social competencies.

Finally, the paper discusses the research findings, investigates the project’s impact, and offers additional recommendations related to the hypotheses.

1.1. The Role and Impact of Science Centers

The importance of the global science center industry is demonstrated by the fact that around one billion people worldwide are exposed to science each year in non-formal learning settings such as science centers, science museums, and other similarly focused institutions. In addition, more than 10 million professional staff and volunteers contribute to the visitor experience (Falk & Dierking, 2019). Science centers in the new millennium significantly influence their environment in various ways. Garnett (2002) adopted a comprehensive approach to analyzing science centers, summarizing their personal, social, political, and economic impacts on the effects of experience centers on communities in his report. Groves (2005) highlighted the financial impact of science center activities, which can be seen, among other things, through the expenditure of the institutions and the various revenues generated by partners providing related services. Bamberger and Tal (2008) underlined the social importance of science center visits in their research. They discovered that the use of interactive games in the science centers generated more interactions between museum educators and students, as well as among visitors themselves, compared to the interaction between students and their teachers.

A study of 17 science centers in 13 countries found that visits to the centers were positively associated with knowledge and understanding of science and technology, interest in and positive identification with science, and openness to related leisure activities (Falk et al., 2016). Research by Falk and Needham (2011) demonstrated the impact of the California Science Center on personal development: 87% of the parents of students who visited the center reported that their children had a better understanding of scientific and technological phenomena after the visit. Also, 79% reported an increase in their children’s curiosity about science. Research by Bamberger and Tal (2008) shows that visits to science centers have both immediate and delayed effects. In particular, a third of the visitors were able to relate what they had seen to their studies months after the visit, and memories of science center games did not fade after 16 months.

1.2. Experiential Education and Science Teaching in Europe and Hungary

The roots of experiential education can be traced back to the educational reform movements of the first half of the 20th century, primarily associated with two key figures: John Dewey and Kurt Hahn. Dewey was a pioneer of progressive educational philosophies (Dewey, 1916, 1938), while Hahn played a crucial role in formally organizing experiential education into a system known as expeditionary learning (Itin, 1999). This model utilizes ‘learning expeditions’ to engage students in real-world projects and fieldwork.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the principles of discovery learning, which emphasize student-centered or autonomous learning, gained prominence (Bruner, 1961; Hermann, 1969). This approach represents a fundamental shift from traditional education, emphasizing learning through discovery and challenge. In contrast to conventional classroom methods, experiential learning engages students through direct, sensory experiences that facilitate deeper understanding. David Kolb developed the experiential learning model, which serves as the theoretical foundation for designing and organizing activities that encourage proactive learning among students. The model consists of four stages: (i) concrete experience, (ii) reflective observation, (iii) abstract conceptualization, and (iv) active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). As Kolb states, learning is “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 41). This process is further supported by the notion that active participation fosters lasting educational impact (Yildirim & Özyilmaz Akamca, 2017).

In addition, experiential learning through task execution enhances problem-solving skills, creativity, and divergent thinking. Moreover, this unconventional learning experience is often associated with teamwork situations, which can build and strengthen mutual trust (Fáyné Dombi & Sztanáné Babics, 2015) and promote the development of cooperative skills and tolerance. The effectiveness of experiential learning is highly dependent on the learners’ level of prior knowledge and cognitive development, the realization of the flow experience from intrinsic motivation (depth and quality of involvement), the enjoyment of performing tasks in the community (Boldizsár & Cseri, 2023), and the level of challenge provided by the activity (Megyeriné Runyó, 2016; Mérő, 2010; Sebestyén et al., 2020).

In 2007, Michel Rocard and his colleagues produced a research report (Rocard Report) on the need for a renewed science education in Europe. In its introduction, it draws attention to “an alarming decline in young people’s interest in key science studies and mathematics”. This is likely to have a very significant consequence: “Europe’s longer-term capacity to innovate and the quality of its research will also decline” (Rocard et al., 2007, p. 2). The group of experts found that the declining interest of young people in science studies is largely due to the way science is taught in schools, so their six recommendations focused on science teaching pedagogy, science teachers, local and European cooperation, and European support.

Almost a decade later, the Scientix 2015 report (Kearney, 2016) highlighted the underachievement of 15-year-olds in science across Europe and found that only a small number of students were interested in pursuing a career in STEM. Another study of students’ views on science education in the UK (Wellcome Trust, 2011 in Bidarra & Rusman, 2017) highlighted the need for more applicable and relevant knowledge that can be transferred to real-world situations in science lessons. In addition, incorporating more practical, hands-on activities with theory would make learning science more engaging and comprehensible.

Based on the objectives of the Rocard Report, the National Council for Public Education (OKNT in Hungarian) set up an ad hoc committee in 2008 to improve the state of public science education in Hungary. The key findings are summarized below (OKNT, 2008). Hungarian public science education faces significant challenges in integrating modern teaching methods and promoting scientific literacy. Some of the main obstacles include outdated teaching methodologies, a lack of learner-centered approaches, insufficient access to experimental equipment, and both financial and attitudinal barriers to progress. Many students find physics and chemistry unappealing and view them as irrelevant to their future careers. Although these subjects require high levels of effort, the teaching methods employed are often ineffective.

Furthermore, assessments do not effectively foster essential scientific competencies, and PISA studies reveal gaps in students’ theoretical understanding, practical skills, and critical thinking skills. Talent development in science is largely confined to elite schools, while interest in science subjects at the GCSE and A-level remains low. Additionally, a critical shortage of qualified physics and chemistry teachers further complicates these issues.

In Hungary, children learn science in an interdisciplinary way from lower primary school to grade 6; however, in grades 7–8 (13–14-year-olds) and further in secondary education, science subjects (chemistry, physics, and biology) are taught in a disciplinary framework. Experience has shown that by the time students enter secondary school (grade 9), a significant proportion of them lack knowledge in science subjects, and their motivation and interest are lower than expected (Vlaszátsné Vanczer, 2023).

The Hungarian National Framework Curriculum for Chemistry Education in Secondary Schools explicitly emphasizes that the aim of learning scientific subjects is not only to expand subject knowledge and develop logical thinking but also to develop a positive attitude toward the subject (Framework Curriculum, 2020). In terms of effectiveness, it has been found that “during the learning experiment, students’ manual dexterity develops, their interest in the subject increases, and the retention is more permanent through the experiential experience” (Vlaszátsné Vanczer, 2023, p. 22). In addition, the teacher’s positive attitude toward science can be a key factor in effective learning. Suhirman and Prayogi (2023, p. 432), addressing the issue of challenges in STEM education, concluded that some effective pedagogical aspects in STEM education and learning are to create “an innovative learning environment that encourages inquiry, experimentation, and critical thinking”. Furthermore, the use of “different authentic learning methods and relevant learning resources” also contributes to the success of STEM education. The social aspects of learning were also highlighted, including the need to promote a collaborative and inclusive learning environment. Finally, reflection can improve teaching practices and make them more effective.

1.3. Attitudes of Hungarian Students Toward Science Subjects

Recognizing the growing number of problems in science education in Hungary, several studies in the 2010s focused on the attitudes of primary and secondary school students toward science subjects. In the 2012 attitudinal survey of 570 seventh-graders conducted by Csíkos (2012), the least popular subjects were ranked in order of unpopularity as follows: geography, mathematics, physics, and chemistry. In the case of physics and geography, it was also found that even students who did well in these subjects disliked them significantly. The survey used an open-ended question format, asking “Which subject do you like the least? Using this method, the unpopularity ranking of subjects differed from that obtained in previous studies using a closed scale (see Papp & Józsa, 2000), showing that physics was repeatedly found to be the least popular subject.

In 2016, Malmos and Chrappán conducted a pilot attitudinal study with 82 secondary school students. The average scores for chemistry and physics were below 3.0 on a scale of 5 for liking and a bit higher for usefulness, confirming the disadvantaged position of these two science subjects among students. The three least liked subjects were chemistry (2.77), mathematics (2.73), and physics (2.03); however, in all cases, students gave slightly higher scores for general usefulness (see

Table 1. The attitudes of secondary school students toward school subjects.

Subject	‘I like It.’	‘I Find It Useful.’
History	4.10	3.50
Foreign language	4.05	3.61
Hungarian language and literature	3.98	4.04
Arts	3.60	2.48
IT	3.24	3.70
Biology	3.22	3.40
Geography	3.19	3.20
Ethics	3.00	3.88
Music	2.90	2.12
Chemistry	2.77	3.62
Mathematics	2.73	3.88
Physics	2.03	2.89

Source: based on Malmos and Chrappán (2016).

). According to 11–13-year-olds, physics was the least useful subject for everyday life (1.65) and for further studies (1.8). The perceived uselessness of physics among secondary school students can be attributed to the fact that there are relatively few university courses that require physics as an entrance subject, and students can avoid taking it as an entrance subject even if it is related to their field of study. Another explanation for the low average usefulness of physics is that very few students apply for university courses that require a physics baccalaureate.

The most recent findings on attitudes toward science subjects come from a large-scale study, based on the pilot study mentioned above, conducted by a research team at the University of Debrecen (Chrappán, 2017). This study also used a four-point Likert scale method of measurement. The results confirmed the national and international results of previous research. Science subjects were at the bottom of the preference ranking, with biology being the most popular and physics and chemistry being the least popular (see

Table 2. The attitudes of students toward science subjects and mathematics.

Type of School	Science Subjects and Mathematics
	Nature Studies	Biology	Geography	Chemistry	Physics	Mathematics
primary (N: 680)	3.9	3.8	3.6	3.1	3.2	3.3
secondary vocational (N: 1030)	-	3.2	3.5	3.1	2.9	3.1
secondary grammar (N: 1885)	-	3.6	3.4	3	2.8	3.6

Source: based on Chrappán (2017).

).

A new phenomenon has been the popularity of the integrated nature studies subject among students in the 5th and 6th grades. The subject is complex, problem-based, and inquiry-based (the curriculum includes compulsory independent investigations, note-taking, and project-based topic work). It tops the popularity list of science subjects, although researchers note that the curriculum is overcrowded (Csákány, 2002; G. Takács, 2003).

A study conducted by Havas (2009) provides a clearer perspective on the topic based on the written opinions of 155 science teachers as well as the views of experts and practicing teachers involved in classroom observations. According to the teachers, the children generally liked and were interested in science. However, regarding the methodology of organizing learning, it was revealed that in practice, teaching was conducted in a frontal manner, learning activities were reduced to following the teacher’s explanation and then memorizing the verbalized material, and very little use was made of group work, fieldwork, or independent work or projects. This is in sharp contrast to the methodological recommendations mentioned above.

The research performed by Malmos and Chrappán (2016) mentioned above also examined the role of subject teachers in shaping students’ attitudes toward subjects. It should be emphasized that students’ attitudes toward science subjects were found to depend primarily on the behavior, methodological culture, and expertise of the teachers. The large sample survey (Chrappán, 2017) also concluded that in biology, geography, physics, and chemistry, the most positive effects are related to the teacher’s kindness, patience, clear explanations, and ability to arouse interest. When examining the subjects individually, it seems that for physics and chemistry teachers, only clear explanations and the ability to arouse interest influence the liking of their subjects.

1.4. The Mobilis Student Lab Project

The most important aims of the Mobilis Student Lab Project (2017–2021) were the promotion of science subjects, the expansion of informal and non-formal learning opportunities, the dissemination of modern experiential education, raising the quality of science education, and, through this, the promotion of science and technology careers. One specific goal of the program was to prevent young children, who are curious and have a natural interest in the world (Bodrova, 2003; van Answegen & Pendergast, 2023), from losing their interest in natural phenomena at an early age. The TIMSS studies (Mullis et al., 2016) clearly show that at the initiation of the Mobilis Project, physics and chemistry formed a much smaller part of the science curriculum for Hungarian lower primary school pupils (grade 4) than in countries with more developed economies. As a result, the introduction of physics and chemistry in grade 7 was completely unexpected by the students. This condition, together with a strong theoretical focus of the curriculum, may have resulted in low initial attitudes toward these subjects (V. Takács, 2001).

Another key objective in the design of the programs was to further educate students who already had a strong interest in science subjects. For this reason, the lower and upper grades were provided with science content that would help stimulate and further strengthen their interest in science and thus in STEM careers. A second and indirect objective of the project was therefore to provide career guidance in science and technology.

The project objectives were successfully achieved through close collaboration with public education institutions and by incorporating activities into the curriculum. The participating schools were offered a variety of activities, including workshops, series of activities, science lessons, small group activities, competitions, quizzes, workshops, clubs, theme days, theme weeks, class trips, and camps. For most activities, several programs were available simultaneously, including six theme days and nine out-of-school science lessons.

After conducting a needs assessment in schools, the primary form of education for pupils in grades 2 to 6 involved the theme days. During one school year, participating classes experienced six theme days, with each topic chosen by their teachers. A theme day was a series of three sessions, with one class attending the sessions on three different topics. One session consisted of a frontal experimental demonstration held by a local instructor and two student experimental sessions, for a total duration of 180 min. The aim of the demonstration was to provide spectacle, experience, and entertainment. Loosely linked to the school curriculum, the spectacular experiments were presented by Mobilis’ leading demonstrators, organized in coherent trains of thought. The student experimentation aimed to gain independent experience by designing and conducting experiments and measurements based on the guidelines of the demonstrators leading the sessions. Over the course of a school year, 30 different types of professional content were delivered in the course of the student lab theme days (Rákosi, 2020). A detailed description of one of the sessions dealing with light is given by Rákosi (2020). The session discussed the temperature dependence of the motion of particles through general particle theory, the electric current in relation to the motion of electric particles, and the magnetic field as a property of the electric current.

The educational objectives of these activities were to develop pupils’ extracurricular competencies, knowledge, and skills, and strengthen their complex interdisciplinary thinking, which were also the main objectives of the project. The results of the impact measurement of these sessions are presented in the findings.

2. Materials and Methods

Following the successful completion of the Mobilis Student Lab Project, the research team contacted the project coordinator and some of the experts involved in the project for a multi-faceted impact assessment of the research and asked for permission and access to the project materials. The research background is described below.

The research tool was an online questionnaire, except for one school where data were collected on paper (see the questionnaire in Appendix A). The questionnaire consisted of 13 questions, including demographic data (school year and gender), single- and multiple-choice questions, and four- or six-point Likert scale questions. To increase the formal, functional, and content validity of the questionnaire, a pilot test involving five participants was conducted in a workshop setting. The professional leader of the student lab was involved in this process and also provided an expert review of the questionnaire. The final form and content of the questionnaire were developed based on the results of the pilot test. Following the feedback received, the questions and the list and order of items in questions 5.2 and 5.3 were refined. According to the testers, the scales used proved to be appropriate. When designing the questionnaire, the authors did not have access to any validated questionnaires on this topic from previous research. In its current form, the questionnaire was developed as part of the research design. Reliability analysis was used to test the internal consistency of the items in questions 5.2 and 5.3. (Question 5.2: How well do you remember the student lab activities? Number of items: 4; Cronbach’s alpha: 0.721; Inter-item correlation: 0.397; F: 185.9; p < 0.005. Question 5.3: How true do you think the following statements are about the student lab activities? Number of items: 11; Cronbach’s alpha: 0.914; Inter-item correlation: 0.493; F: 73.5; p < 0.005)

In terms of themes, the survey first assessed the students’ level of familiarity with the Mobilis Interactive Exhibition Centre and the activities they had participated in, including class trips, workshops, summer camp, programming in MobillTy, and experimental activities in the science center, as well as the time intervals of these activities. Subsequently, inquiries were made regarding the students’ recollections and experiences associated with student lab activities and their attitudes toward these sessions. In this context, there were some questions about the students’ attitudes toward science subjects and their grades in science subjects at school. Finally, participants were asked to rate their likelihood of choosing a career in a STEM field.

The research involved 7th- and 8th-graders (N = 592) from 17 schools (7 from Győr and another 10 from the neighboring villages) reflecting on their experiences of student lab theme days, including pupils who had not participated in the experimental ‘off-site’ activities. The survey was recruited in consultation with school leaders, and data collection took place in June 2024. The data were processed using statistical methods, including cross-tabulation analysis (for categorical variables) and one-way analysis of variance (for comparison of group means).

The research was conducted with the approval of the Research Ethics Committee of Széchenyi István University. The corresponding ethical approval code is 002/2024.

3. Results

3.1. Research Finding 1

In the first phase of the research, we investigated whether experiential education outside the classroom had a positive impact on the attitudes toward science among students who had participated in the Mobilis student lab theme days for more than two academic years. Out of the total sample (N = 592), 74.4% (n = 441) of the students reported having participated in the theme day activities, 54.2% (n = 239) for less than two academic years, and 45.8% (n = 202) for more than two academic years. The values of these two groups are analyzed below in terms of their openness to and positive attitude toward the two science disciplines (physics and chemistry) focused on by Mobilis. The students’ attitudes were analyzed on a four-point Likert scale (question 6.1), where a higher number indicates greater openness.

Students who participated in the theme days for more than two years had an average openness to physics of 2.32 (mean score, Std Deviation 0.993) and an average openness to chemistry of 2.63 (Std Deviation 0.895). In contrast, those who attended the same programs for less than two years had an average openness to physics of 2.47 (Std Deviation 0.956) and an average openness to chemistry of 2.48 (Std Deviation 0.952). These values indicate that there is no significant correlation between the length of participation and the openness to physics and/or chemistry in the overall sample.

However, interesting results were obtained when analyzing the whole sample by gender. Among girls, the average physics score of those who participated in the theme day sessions for more than two years (mean = 2.02; Std Deviation 0.890; n = 107) is notably lower than the average of those who participated in them for up to two years (mean = 2.39; Std Deviation 0.895; n = 133). Attitudes toward chemistry show similar values for the subgroups of girls: those who participated in them for less than two years have a value of 2.45 (Std Deviation 0.917), while the average openness of girls who participated in the theme days for more than two years is almost the same at 2.48 (Std Deviation 0.851). For boys, attitudes toward physics are similar in the two subgroups: those who participated in the theme days for less than two years (n = 106) have a mean score of 2.57 (Std Deviation 1.024), while those who participated in them for longer (n = 95) have a slightly higher mean score of 2.66 (Std Deviation 0.996). However, boys’ attitudes toward chemistry show significantly different scores: those who participated in the theme days for longer have a mean score of 2.81 (Std Deviation 0.914) compared to 2.52 (Std Deviation 0.997) for those who participated in them for up to two years.

Based on the above, girls who participated in the program for more than two years have the weakest attitudes toward physics (p < 0.002), while the attitudes of boys participating in the program for more than 2 years toward chemistry are the strongest (p < 0.033).

The attitude-forming effect of the student lab theme days was also investigated with an additional question analyzing the level of agreement with the statement “I have a more positive attitude toward STEM subjects thanks to the Mobilis theme days”. This time, respondents rated the truth of this statement on a six-point Likert scale (question 5.3, statement 11). For scores 1–4, no significant differences were found between those who had participated in the program for more than two years and those who had participated for a shorter period; however, differences were observed between the two highest scores.

A higher proportion (58.8%) of students who had been in the program for less than two years chose a score of 5 (i.e., strongly agreed with the positive statement above) compared with 41.2% of students who had been in the program for longer. However, the proportion of students who fully agreed with the statement (score 6) was much higher among those who had been in the program for more than two years (59.6%) than among those who had been in the program for a shorter period (40.4%). A statistically significant difference was found when testing the occurrence of the “6 = totally agree” responses among students who participated in the program for more than two years and those who participated in it for up to two years. (Fisher’s Exact Test, p = 0.032).

Table 3. Students’ positive attitude toward STEM subjects.

	Participated in Theme Days for up to 2 Years	Participated in Theme Days for More than 2 Years
1 = not true at all	57.1%	42.9%
2	47.3%	52.7%
3	57.4%	42.6%
4	55.7%	44.3%
5	58.8%	41.2%
6 = completely true	40.4%	59.6%

Source: own compilation.

presents the differences between students who participated in the theme days program for up to two years and those who participated for more than two years in terms of their agreement with the statement that they have a positive attitude toward STEM subjects, thanks to the Mobilis theme days.

The gender analysis revealed that there was little difference between the two subgroups in the level of agreement with positive attitudes toward the subjects studied (

Table 4. Students’ positive attitude toward STEM subjects by gender.

Gender	Participation in Theme Days	N	Mean	Std Dev.
girls	up to 2 years	133	3.27	1.582
	more than 2 years	107	3.21	1.552
	total	240	3.24	1.566
boys	up to 2 years	106	3.73	1.377
	more than 2 years	95	3.97	1.540
	total	201	3.84	1.458

Source: own compilation.

). The average score (3.27) for girls who participated in the program for less than two years was slightly higher than for those girls who participated for more than two years (3.21). The average score for boys was inherently higher. The average score of boys who participated in the program for more than two years (3.97) was significantly higher than the score of those who participated in the program for a shorter period (3.73).

The results partly confirm the first hypothesis. Student lab theme days had a more positive impact on the STEM subject attitudes of boys who participated in them for longer than two years compared to those who participated in the theme days for a shorter period. This hypothesis was not confirmed for girls, whose attitudes did not improve with time spent in the student lab.

3.2. Research Finding 2

In the next phase of the research, we examined the extent to which the final objectives of the project were met, i.e., whether there was a difference in the level of openness to STEM careers between the participants in the student lab theme days sessions and the control group (question 6.3,

Table 5. Students’ positive attitude toward STEM subjects.

Theme Days Status	’No’ Is Not Open to STEM Career	’Yes’ + ’Maybe’ Is Open to STEM Career	‘Do Not Know.’ Uncertain About STEM Career
did not participate (n = 151)	49.0%	32.5%	18.5%
participated (n = 441)	37.2%	45.1%	17.7%
total (n = 592)	40.2%	41.9%	17.9%

Source: own compilation.

). Among the students who participated in the theme days (n = 441), the percentage of positive responses to the career choice question (“yes” or “maybe” option) was 45.1%, and 37.2% rejected STEM careers. In comparison, in the control group (n = 151), only 32.5% were open to STEM careers, and 49.0% rejected this option. The percentage of undecided respondents who chose the “don’t know yet” option is almost equal between students who attended STEM courses (17.7%) and the control group (18.5%).

Among girls who participated in the theme days (n = 240), 41.3% responded positively and 35.4% responded negatively, a difference of 5.9 percentage points. However, only 34.8% of the girls in the control group (who did not attend the theme days) responded positively to the same question. For boys who participated in the same program (n = 201), the sessions appeared to be even more effective, with an openness rate for STEM careers of 49.8% and a rejection rate of only 39.3%, a difference of 10.5 percentage points. Taking a different approach, the rejection rate for STEM careers among boys who did not attend the student lab is 58.5%, while only 39.3% of boys who participated in the theme days were negative about this issue. A similar difference can be found in the openness to STEM careers: 49.8% of boys who participated in the sessions were open to STEM careers compared to only 30.5% of boys who did not participate in them.

Finally, regarding STEM career choices, there is also a significant difference in the level of uncertainty between boys and girls. This means that 23.3% of the girls who participated in the student lab were uncertain about STEM career choices, while only 10.9% of the boys who participated in the sessions chose this option (

Table 6. Students’ openness to STEM careers by gender.

Gender	Theme Days Status	’No’ Is Not Open to STEM Career	’Yes’ + ’Maybe’ Is Open to STEM Career	‘Do Not Know’. Uncertain About STEM Career
girls	did not participate (n = 69)	37.7%	34.8%	27.5%
	participated (n = 240)	35.4%	41.3%	23.3%
	total (n = 309)	35.9%	39.8%	24.3%
boys	did not participate (n = 82)	58.5%	30.5%	11.0%
	participated (n = 201)	39.3%	49.8%	10.9%
	total (n = 283)	44.9%	44.2%	11.0%

Source: own compilation.

).

The results confirm the second hypothesis. Students who participated in the student lab theme days are more open to STEM careers than students in the control group who did not participate in the program. The results are not significant for girls (p < 0.598), while the high value for boys (p < 0.008) results in a significance level for the entire sample (p < 0.016).

3.3. Research Finding 3

In the third phase of the research, we analyzed whether the memory of the theme days sessions still remained with the students after several years and what proportion of them remembered the conditions, atmosphere, and professional content of the sessions. Four items were rated on a four-point Likert scale (question 5.2), with higher scores indicating that students remembered more or almost everything about the item. The four items were (1) lessons learned and experiments, (2) working conditions, e.g., white coat and tools, (3) instructors, and (4) impression and atmosphere.

The aggregated value of the above four items was 2.68 (Std Deviation 0.664) on a four-point scale, which means that the memories of the activities are more vivid than average in the minds of the students, even after several years. At the same time, there are significant differences in the extent to which the students recall the factors: with a value of 3.25 (Std Deviation 0.891), the strength of recall of the working conditions, white coats, and tools is particularly strong; the second highest value is the atmosphere of the sessions (2.81; Std Deviation 0.932); the recall of the instructors is 2.44 (Std Deviation 1.010); while the lowest value of 2.21 (Std Deviation 0.747) is for the subject content of the sessions, the material taught, and the experiments. In terms of gender, girls scored slightly higher (2.72; Std Deviation 0.619) than boys (2.62; Std Deviation 0.711), but no significance was found (

Table 7. Students’ memories of lab sessions by gender.

Mean by Gender and Total	Students’ Memories of Lab Sessions (1 = ‘I Don’t Remember Them.’ … 4 = ‘I Remember Everything.’)
	Lessons Learned, Experiments	Working Conditions, e.g., White Coat, Tools	Instructors	Impressions, Atmosphere	Overall Average
girls (N: 240)	2.20	3.38	2.47	2.84	2.72
boys (N: 201)	2.22	3.10	2.40	2.77	2.62
total (N: 441)	2.21	3.25	2.44	2.81	2.68

Source: own compilation.

).

The results confirm the third hypothesis. The environment and atmosphere of the sessions are better remembered by the participants than the subject content of the sessions.

3.4. Research Finding 4

The final phase of the study focused on whether the impact of the student lab activities went beyond science education for young students and whether participation in the theme days contributed to the development of students’ personal and social competencies. A related question on the questionnaire assessed the degree of agreement with various statements on a six-point Likert scale, with the highest score indicating complete agreement. A total of 11 different statements were presented to the students about the theme days, of which the following three items are considered relevant to the present topic:

• I left the sessions (most of the time) with a sense of achievement.
• It was good to be able to participate in the experiments ourselves.
• It was fun to work in pairs and groups.

Items 1 and 2 focus on the development of personal skills, and item 3 on the development of social skills.

The values of the personal impact items were 4.09 (Std Deviation 1.441) and 4.60 (Std Deviation 1.438), and the value of the social development item was also 4.60 (Std Deviation 1.474), which are above average in themselves and also above the average value of the aggregated variable (4.04; Std Deviation 1.072) of the 11 (partly irrelevant) competencies. Items 2 and 3 were considered statistically significant (p < 0.000 and p < 0.002). In terms of gender, boys left with a higher proportion of sense of achievement (4.17; Std Deviation 1.518 compared to 4.02, Std Deviation 1.372) than girls. In contrast, girls enjoyed the opportunity to participate in the experiments on their own more (4.85; Std Deviation 1.252 compared to 4.30; Std Deviation 1.584) than boys. The social impact of the project is also stronger for girls: the value of the item on working in pairs and groups is 4.80 (Std Deviation 1.385) compared to 4.37 (Std Deviation 1.544) for boys.

The results confirm the fourth hypothesis. The activities of the student lab theme days have led to the strengthening of personal and social competencies.

4. Discussion

The results of the research on attitudes can be summarized as follows. On the whole, there is no significant correlation between the length of participation in the student lab theme days and a more positive attitude toward physics and/or chemistry in the overall sample. However, the results of the subjectively assessed attitudinal measures show that students who participated in the sessions for more than two years had more positive attitudes toward STEM subjects. Within this, boys’ attitudes were significantly more influenced by the theme days, particularly for those who had participated in them for more than two years (3.79 vs. 3.73).

If we analyze the subject results separately, it turns out that students who had participated in the student lab theme days for more than two years had the highest attitudes toward chemistry. Also in chemistry, there was a significantly better result for boys who had been in the student lab for more than two years. Girls’ attitudes toward chemistry were not affected by the length of the visits, and their attitudes also showed lower scores. In physics, there were no significant differences in terms of duration. Still, girls were inversely affected by the length of visits, and their attitudes toward physics were particularly low: girls who had taken part in the theme days for more than two years had the weakest attitudes in the whole sample.

Based on the above findings, it is recommended that the program be further developed in a way that allows boys to participate in longer-term activities extending beyond two years, as such sustained engagement is expected to enhance their attitudes toward chemistry in particular. In the case of girls, it is advisable to redesign the learning experience itself—for example, by incorporating topics situated in broader real-world contexts. A review highlights that girls tend to gravitate toward chemistry topics related to human health and everyday life (Hofstein & Mamlok-Naaman, 2011). Another study by Kerger et al. (2011) shows that presenting scientific topics (including chemistry) in a social or ‘female-friendly’ context, for instance, how lasers are used in cosmetic surgery versus reading CDs, significantly boosts girls’ interest in subjects they would otherwise rate lower.

Next, the effectiveness of the theme days and the positive impact of extracurricular, methodologically diverse forms of education on openness to STEM careers are also evident. The results are significant for the whole sample due to the boys’ results proving significant again. Boys who participated in the theme days were 19.3% more likely to choose a STEM career than those who did not. Girls also showed positive results, but to a lesser extent, with a difference of 6.5%. This result aligns with longitudinal research findings on participation and attainment in STEM focusing on women (Smith & White, 2024). As research confirms, educational practices, such as the nature of science education and curriculum in schools, have a decisive influence on teenagers’ career choices (Archer et al., 2020). This is particularly important for girls, given that, according to UNESCO’s 2024 Gender Report (Global Education Monitoring Report Team, 2024), women accounted for only 35% of STEM graduates on average.

All of the above results highlighting gender differences confirm the conclusions of previous research (see a systematic literature review of the topic by Brotman & Moore, 2008). It is suggested that STEM programs designed for girls help increase their self-efficacy in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology (Chatman et al., 2008; Hizieak-Clark et al., 2015). As Papp and Józsa (2000, p. 63) put it, specifically related to girls’ attitudes toward physics, “we need to pay more attention to shaping girls’ attitudes in both primary and secondary school”.

Another success of the project was the strengthening of personal and social skills, which also showed significantly relevant results, but again, there were differences between boys and girls. Boys scored higher on the individual success factor, while girls were more likely to appreciate the social factor of the theme days.

One of the most important conclusions of the research is the differences between boys’ and girls’ results. It indicates that there is a need for gender-inclusive development programs, including topics, tasks, and experiments that are likely to be of interest to girls. Conscious inclusion and the use of female role models in activities are also worth considering. For instance, to challenge gender stereotypes (Bian et al., 2017), STEM programs should prioritize female speakers and participants over male ones. As the European Commission: Directorate-General for Education et al.’s (2024) report suggests, early exposure, supportive environments, inclusive teaching, and visible female role models are crucial to maintaining girls’ engagement. The report also claims that girls often perform as well as or better than boys in STEM, but they show lower confidence, which affects their interest in continuing in these fields (European Commission: Directorate-General for Education et al., 2024).

As the social impact was powerful for the girls (see Research Finding 4), it would be useful to build on this by deepening the knowledge with further small group activities or other collaborative exercises and practices. At the same time, girls may need more guidance provided by the instructors during individual experiments to achieve the same sense of personal accomplishment as boys and to be able to avoid socially embarrassing situations. As George et al. (2020) found, teachers’ ability and readiness to create a supportive learning environment where students feel confident to take risks and seek help, when necessary, can also positively influence girls’ attitudes toward science subjects. Boys should also have some guidance on how to be more cooperative and work in groups, which is regarded as an essential soft skill. It would be important to assess and take into account the specific needs and interests of girls and boys before designing similar programs in the future. In the 2020 National Curriculum, the chapter on methodological principles lists some modern pedagogical approaches that should be given greater emphasis in schools’ pedagogical practice. The methods include the following:

-

Active learning;

-

Development of student competencies;

-

The promotion of personalized learning opportunities;

-

Learning based on student collaboration (Veres, 2021).

As these methodological suggestions align with the Mobilis project’s design, the results of the present study could be used for curriculum planning and teacher training, completed with a gender-inclusive design approach.

Research findings also indicated that participants struggled to recall content elements and the knowledge they had acquired over the years, while they were more successful in remembering their working conditions. It should be noted that there were no significant gender differences. Research confirms that single exposures to information rarely result in long-term learning (Dunlosky & Rawson, 2015). Involving more senses in the learning process also helps to retain the details (Budson & Kensinger, 2023). To put it differently, “immersive, experiential learning and the deployment of self-directed learning approaches can be the catalyst for deepening student engagement and improving learning outcomes” (Playfoot et al., 2017, p. 4145). In order to keep the content for a longer period, videos and digital diary-style reports of the sessions could be given to the participants as take-home experiences. Also, the off-site session should be confirmed by classroom follow-up activities to deepen the experiments and by classroom reflections on what was said, performed, and tried in the student lab. It is worth considering incorporating entry and exit quizzes, as well as immediate feedback, into programs. This would help students deepen their experience and knowledge and provide valuable input for program designers to fine-tune the program if necessary.

Previous research (Chrappán, 2017) indicated that teachers play a prominent role in students’ attitudes toward STEM subjects. To create a better impact, it should be beneficial to invite former students of the student lab who have pursued STEM careers back to similar programs, as some may eventually become teachers themselves. Therefore, it is necessary to track the career paths of participants so that new students can see positive examples and role models.

The results presented in this paper, along with the professional and methodological experience gained from the implementation of the Mobilis Student Lab Project, can be utilized in teacher training methodology programs, particularly emphasizing gender differences.

Despite the positive findings of this study, several limitations should be acknowledged. Firstly, the research relied predominantly on self-reported data from students, which may be subject to response bias and memory distortion, particularly since some respondents reflected on experiences from several years prior. Although efforts were made to validate the questionnaire, the lack of standardized, validated instruments in this context limits the comparability of the results with those of similar studies.

Secondly, although the research sample was relatively large, it was not nationally representative, focusing solely on schools in Győr and the surrounding area. Thus, the generalizability of the findings to other regions or educational contexts may be limited.

Thirdly, the impact evaluation was largely quantitative and did not incorporate qualitative data, such as interviews with students, teachers, or parents, which might have provided deeper insights into the mechanisms behind attitude change or long-term memory retention.

Fourthly, conclusions drawn on the basis of gender should be treated with caution. While the statistical analysis revealed differences between boys and girls, the study did not explore the underlying reasons in depth, such as cultural, pedagogical, or psychosocial factors that may influence gendered attitudes towards science.

Finally, while the study measured some medium-term outcomes, it did not assess long-term educational trajectories or career choices. Longitudinal tracking of participants could offer a more robust understanding of the program’s real-world impact.

Future research should address these limitations by employing mixed methods, expanding the geographic scope, and incorporating longitudinal designs.