Integrated Science Education Journal
Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

6.1

Impact

GScholar

18

H-Index

Integrated Science Education Journal

an Open Access Journal

STEM-ESD Learning Based on Engineering Design Process and Reverse Engineering Toward Student Action on SDG-6

Ayudya Fitriyani ORCID
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
ayudya@upi.edu
Rini Solihat
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Ari Widodo
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to analyze the effect of STEM-ESD learning—implemented through two engineering approaches, Engineering Design Process (EDP) and Reverse Engineering (RE)—on student action competency related to SDG-6 (clean water and sanitation) among secondary school students.

    Methodology: Mixed-methods convergent design. Participants: 108 students in three groups (two experimental: EDP and RE; one control; 36 per group). Instruments: action questionnaire, student worksheets, open-ended questionnaires, structured interviews. Analysis: descriptive statistics, Shapiro-Wilk normality test, Levene homogeneity test, one-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis test.

    Main Findings: Neither EDP nor RE produced a statistically significant overall improvement in student action compared to the control group. However, at the indicator level: the RE group showed significant gains in competency achievement; the EDP group consistently outperformed others on current action and future action indicators. Both approaches demonstrate distinct, complementary mechanisms of influence.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study uniquely integrates STEM-ESD with two contrasting engineering approaches (EDP and RE) to address SDG-6, revealing their differential effects on student action competency. It advances knowledge by demonstrating that EDP and RE are not interchangeable but serve complementary functions—RE builds conceptual competence while EDP fosters action orientation and behavioral commitment.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “STEM-ESD Learning Based on Engineering Design Process and Reverse Engineering Toward Student Action on SDG-6”, In. Sci. Ed. J, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 639–649, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.37251/isej.v7i4.3462.

    More Citation Formats

  • 13
    Abstract views
    13
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. [1] S. J. Mostacedo-Marasovic, A. Bolivar-Lobaton, and M. Walter, “Social hydrology in science education: Framing socio-hydrological issues for SDG-6 learning,” Water, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 412, 2022, doi: 10.3390/w14030412.
    2. [2] UN-Water, “Summary Progress Update 2021: SDG 6 — Water and Sanitation for All,” UN-Water, Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.unwater.org/publications/summary-progress-update-2021-sdg-6-water-and-sanitation-for-all
    3. [3] J. Rockstrom et al., “A safe operating space for humanity,” Nature, vol. 461, no. 7263, pp. 472–475, 2009, doi: 10.1038/461472a.
    4. [4] B. Setiawan, A. Rachmatullah, and J. Choo, “STEM integration with education for sustainable development: A conceptual framework for contextual learning,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 19, no. 4, p. em2248, 2023, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/13056.
    5. [5] M. E. Hoque, M. A. Rahman, and M. S. Islam, “STEM-ESD integration in promoting sustainability literacy: A systematic review,” J. Educ. Sustain. Dev., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 45–63, 2022, doi: 10.1177/09734082221084801.
    6. [6] C. L. R. Mahanani, D. Ardianto, and M. Z. Arifin, “Implementation of robotics-integrated ESD STEM learning to improve elementary school students’ creative thinking and communication skills,” Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 42-53, 2026, doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v12i5.14659.
    7. [7] T. Chrysochou, G. Katsiampoura, and C. Skordoulis, “From STS to STEM: rethinking STEM education,” Discover Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 381, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s44217-025-00784-0.
    8. [8] R. P. Verhoeff, A. Knippels, C. Gilissen, and A. Boersma, “The theoretical nature of systems thinking. Perspectives on systems thinking in biology education,” Front. Educ., vol. 3, p. 40, 2018, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2018.00040.
    9. [9] H. Abukari, Z. A. Imoro, F. U. Abubakari, and T. K. Aikins, “Ecosystem services knowledge and conservation attitudes of senior high school students,” Rangeland Ecology & Management, vol. 107, pp. 85-90, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.rama.2026.04.007.
    10. [10] I. Sadeh and M. Zion, “The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 1137–1160, 2009, doi: 10.1002/tea.20310.
    11. [11] L. Wang, B. Gao, X. Chang, and L. Zhang, “The promotive effect of ocean literacy on marine conservation behavior: A qualitative study based on Chinese university students,” Plos one, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 0323510, 2025, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323510.
    12. [12] H. Q. Hoa, “Integrating design thinking into STEM education: Enhancing problem-solving skills of high school students,” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 2611, 2025, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/16084.
    13. [13] D. Olsson, N. Gericke, and P. C. Rundgren, “The effect of implementation of education for sustainable development in Swedish compulsory schools: Assessing pupils' sustainability consciousness,” Environ. Educ. Res., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 176–202, 2016, doi: 10.1080/13504622.2015.1005057.
    14. [14] P. T. Espinosa-Gutiérrez, E. Gavari-Starkie, C. Lucini-Baquero, and J. Pastrana-Huguet, “STEAM education using natural resources in rural areas: Case study of a grouped rural school in Avila, Spain,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 2736, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17062736.
    15. [15] J. W. Creswell and V. L. P. Clark, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications, 2018.
    16. [16] S. Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D [Quantitative, Qualitative, and R&D Research Methods]. Bandung, Indonesia: Alfabeta, 2019.
    17. [17] M. B. Miles, A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldana, Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications, 2014.
    18. [18] W. Widhiarso, Uji Hipotesis Komparatif [Comparative Hypothesis Testing]. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Universitas Gadjah Mada Press, 2010.
    19. [19] R. W. Bybee, The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Arlington, VA, USA: NSTA Press, 2013.
    20. [20] T. R. Kelley and J. G. Knowles, “A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 11, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
    21. [21] R. Coe, “It's the effect size, stupid: What effect size is and why it is important,” presented at Br. Educ. Res. Assoc. Annu. Conf., 2002.
    22. [22] J. Hattie, Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. New York, NY, USA: Routledge, 2009.
    23. [23] A. A. Akinsemolu, and H. Onyeaka, “The role of green education in achieving the sustainable development goals: A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 210, pp. 115239, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.115239.
    24. [24] A. E. J. Wals, Beyond Unreasonable Doubt: Education and Learning for Socio-Ecological Sustainability in the Anthropocene. Wageningen, Netherlands: Wageningen Univ., 2015.
    25. [25] UNESCO, Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing, 2017.
    26. [26] G. M. Alam, “Sustainable education, sustainability in education and education for sustainable development: the reconciliation of variables and the path of education research in an era of technologization,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 250, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17010250.
    27. [27] J. Laessoe and Y. Mochizuki, “Recent trends in national policy on education for sustainable development and climate change education,” J. Educ. Sustain. Dev., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 4–33, 2015, doi: 10.1177/0973408215569112.
    28. [28] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Educational Objectives. New York, NY, USA: Longman, 2001.
    29. [29] T. Stouthart, D. Bayram, and J. van Der Veen, “Science teachers’ views on student competences in education for sustainable development,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 1617-1653, 2025, doi: 10.1002/tea.22021.
    30. [30] M. E. Hoque, F. A. M. Yusuf, F. M. Widad, and B. Musthafa, “Impact of product analysis-based STEM learning on students’ science literacy and sustainability competence,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 18, p. 11287, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141811287.
    31. [31] Y. Li, M. H. Chiu, and S. L. Wong, “Integration of artifact analysis in STEM learning: A meta-analysis of conceptual understanding outcomes,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 1801–1823, 2021, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1934564.
    32. [32] S. Vidal, and M. Kuckuck, “Pre-Service teacher action competence in education for sustainable development: a scoping review,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 3856, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17093856.
    33. [33] J. W. Pellegrino and M. L. Hilton, Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2012.
    34. [34] L. D. English, “STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1.
    35. [35] A. Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY, USA: W. H. Freeman, 1997.
    36. [36] R. Paloș, D. Vîrgă, and R. Dediu, “Students’ approach to learning and their intrinsic motivation to know–the moderating role of psychological needs,” Current Psychology, vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 11757-11770, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s12144-025-07990-x.
    37. [37] S. Han, R. Capraro, and M. M. Capraro, “How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement,” Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1089–1113, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s10763-014-9526-0.
    38. [38] A. Husin, H. Helmi, Y. K. Nengsih, and M. Rendana, “Environmental education in schools: sustainability and hope,” Discover Sustainability, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 41, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s43621-025-00837-2.
    39. [39] H. Liu, Y. Wang, and H. Wang, “Exploring the mediating roles of motivation and boredom in basic psychological needs and behavioural engagement in English learning: a self-determination theory perspective,” BMC psychology, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 179, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-02524-3.
    40. [40] J. S. Eccles and A. Wigfield, “Motivational beliefs, values, and goals,” Annu. Rev. Psychol., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 109–132, 2002, doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153.
    41. [41] H. C. Le, V. H. Nguyen, and T. L. Nguyen, “Integrated STEM approaches and associated outcomes of K-12 student learning: A systematic review,” Education Sciences, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 297, 2023, doi: 10.3390/educsci13030297.
    42. [42] F. E. Weinert, “Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification,” in Defining and Selecting Key Competencies, D. S. Rychen and L. H. Salganik, Eds. Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber, 2001, pp. 45–65.
    43. [43] R. E. Mayer, “Rote versus meaningful learning,” Theory Into Pract., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 226–232, 2002, doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4.
    44. [44] Z. Faizah, D. Rochintaniawati, N. Winarno, and R. Solihat, “Implementation strategy of education for sustainable development (ESD) in science education: a systematic literature review,” Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Science Education), vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1255-1277, 2026, doi: 10.24815/jpsi.v14i1.176.
    45. [45] X. S. Apedoe, B. Reynolds, M. R. Ellefson, and C. D. Schunn, “Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: The heating/cooling unit,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 454–465, 2008, doi: 10.1007/s10956-008-9114-6.
    46. [46] J. Pozuelo-Muñoz, A. de Echave Sanz, and E. C. Salillas, “Inquiring in the Science Classroom by PBL: A Design-Based Research Study,” Education Sciences, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 53, 2025, doi: 10.3390/educsci15010053.
    47. [47] UNICEF and WHO, Progress on Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene 2000–2022: Special Focus on Gender. New York, NY, USA: UNICEF and WHO, 2023.
    48. [48] S. Wahyuni, A. Humaira, and D. Khoirunnisa, “Access to clean water and sanitation in Indonesian schools: Challenges and implications for environmental education,” J. Environ. Educ., vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 234–248, 2021, doi: 10.1080/00958964.2021.1903901.
    49. [49] J. Krajcik and N. Shin, “Project-based learning,” in The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 2nd ed., R. K. Sawyer, Ed. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014, pp. 275–297.
    50. [50] P. R. Hernandez, H. J. Boone, and J. A. Brown, “Contextualizing STEM: Project-based learning for relevance and community,” J. STEM Educ. Innov. Res., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 5–12, 2020, doi: 10.37626/GA9783959871440.0.02.
    51. [51] M. M. Mekonnen and A. Y. Hoekstra, “Four billion people facing severe water scarcity,” Sci. Adv., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1500323, 2016, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1500323.
    52. [52] A. Amprazis, and P. Papadopoulou, “Key competencies in education for sustainable development: A valuable framework for enhancing plant awareness,” Plants, People, Planet, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1195-1211, 2025, doi: 10.1002/ppp3.10625.
    53. [53] M. M. Omer, R. A. Rahman, M. A. Fauzi, and S. Almutairi, “Key competencies for identifying construction activities that produce recyclable materials: a competency gap analysis,” Built Environment Project and Asset Management, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 699-716, 2025, doi: 10.1108/BEPAM-10-2023-0181.
    54. [54] D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall, 1984.
    55. [55] J. Mezirow, Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass, 1991.
    56. [56] J. Biggs and C. Tang, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th ed. Maidenhead, U.K.: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill, 2011.
    57. [57] N. Mentzer, K. Becker, and M. Sutton, “Engineering design thinking: High school students' performance and knowledge,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 417–432, 2015, doi: 10.1002/jee.20105.
    58. [58] J. Cincera and J. Krajhanzl, “Eco-schools: What factors influence pupils' action competence for pro-environmental behaviour?,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 61, pp. 117–121, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.030.
    59. [59] M. S. Hagger, and K. Hamilton, “Progress on theory of planned behavior research: advances in research synthesis and agenda for future research,” Journal of Behavioral Medicine, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 43-56, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10865-024-00545-8.

Categories