Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education
Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education

Advancing Physics and Physics Education Through Research and Innovation

Scopus

54

Citation

Dimension

413

Citation

Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education

Advancing Physics and Physics Education Through Research and Innovation

Can STEM-PjBL Improve Climate Change Knowledge? The Mediating Role of Science Process Skills in Junior High School Physics

Ning Intan Lestari Apriliza
Sriwijaya University ROR
Indonesia
ningintanapriliza@gmail.com
Kullawat Inthaud
Yupparaj Wittayalai School
Thailand
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study examined the relationships among STEM project-based learning (STEM-PjBL) learning experience, science process skills, and climate change knowledge among junior high school students in physics education.

    Methodology: A quantitative explanatory correlational design was employed involving 200 junior high school students with prior STEM-PjBL experience. Data were collected using a 16-item STEM-PjBL learning experience questionnaire, a structured observation rubric for science process skills, and a 24-item objective climate change knowledge test. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and bootstrapping were used to evaluate the measurement and structural models and test the hypothesized relationships.

    Main Findings: All three hypothesized relationships were positive and statistically significant. STEM-PjBL learning experience had the strongest association with science process skills (β = 0.521, p < 0.001), followed by its association with climate change knowledge (β = 0.219, p < 0.001). Science process skills were also positively associated with climate change knowledge (β = 0.161, p < 0.001). The model explained 27.1% of the variance in science process skills and 44.3% in climate change knowledge.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study integrates STEM-PjBL learning experience, science process skills, and climate change knowledge within a single PLS-SEM framework. By examining their direct relationships simultaneously, it provides evidence of the relative strength of these associations and highlights the relevance of integrated STEM project experiences and scientific competencies for climate change education without assuming causal effects or an untested mediation mechanism.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    N. I. L. Apriliza and K. Inthaud, “Can STEM-PjBL Improve Climate Change Knowledge? The Mediating Role of Science Process Skills in Junior High School Physics”, Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 267–277, Oct. 2026, doi: 10.37251/sjpe.v7i5.3914.

    More Citation Formats

  • 2
    Abstract views
    2
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. A. Markula and M. Aksela, “The key characteristics of project-based learning: How teachers implement projects in K-12 science education,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 2, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s43031-021-00042-x.
    2. A. Rumjaun and F. Narod, “Social Learning Theory—Albert Bandura BT - Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory,” B. Akpan and T. J. Kennedy, Eds., Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 65–82. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-81351-1_5.
    3. T. Tanti, D. A. Kurniawan, K. Kuswanto, W. Utami, and I. Wardhana, “Science process skills and critical thinking in science: Urban and rural disparity,” J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 9, no. 4, 2020, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v9i4.24139.
    4. S. Syahrial et al., “Content analysis of student learning videos for teacher professional education programs based on Gagne’s learning theory,” J. Ilm. Pendidik. Profesi Guru, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 552–563, 2024, doi: 10.23887/jippg.v7i3.84354.
    5. Z. Ma, G. Jiang, and J. Chen, “Physics-informed ensemble learning with residual modeling for enhanced building energy prediction,” Energy Build., vol. 323, p. 114853, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.114853.
    6. T. Tanti, D. A. Kurniawan, N. Kurniawan, and L. Anggraini, “Attitudes toward science based on analysis and correlation: Learning enjoyment & leisure interest on science,” Form. J. Ilm. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 11, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.30998/formatif.v11i1.5142.
    7. R. S. Retno, P. Purnomo, A. Hidayat, and A. Mashfufah, “Conceptual framework design for STEM-integrated project-based learning (PjBL-STEM) for elementary schools,” Asian Educ. Dev. Stud., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 579–604, May 2025, doi: 10.1108/AEDS-08-2024-0188.
    8. R. A. Rochim, P. Prabowo, M. Budiyanto, E. Hariyono, and B. K. Prahani, “The use of STEM-integrated project-based learning models to improve learning outcomes of junior high school students,” in Proceedings of the Eighth Southeast Asia Design Research (SEA-DR) & the Second Science, Technology, Education, Arts, Culture, and Humanity (STEACH) International Conference (SEADR-STEACH 2021), Atlantis Press, 2022, pp. 211–218. doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.211229.034.
    9. D. A. Kurniawan, A. Astalini, Darmaji, Tanti, and S. Maryani, “Innovative learning: Gender perception of e-module linear equations in mathematics and physics,” Indones. J. Learn. Adv. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 92–106, 2022, doi: 10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.16610.
    10. R. Megawati, “Integration of project-based learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to improve students’ biology practical skills in higher education: A systematic review,” Open Educ. Stud., vol. 6, no. 1, p. 20240049, 2024, doi: 10.1515/edu-2024-0049.
    11. M. Nuswowati, “Mapping research trends on STEM-integrated project-based learning in physics education : A bibliometric review,” J. Educ. Learn., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1859–1872, 2025, doi: 10.11591/edulearn.v19i4.22999.
    12. S. Wildbichler, C. Haagen-Schützenhöfer, and T. Schubatzky, “Students’ ideas about the scientific underpinnings of climate change: a systematic review of the literature,” Stud. Sci. Educ., vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 117–169, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1080/03057267.2024.2395206.
    13. R. D. Handayani and Triyanto, “Seventh-grade students’ conceptions of climate change, global warming, and the greenhouse effect,” J. Geosci. Educ., vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 490–500, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1080/10899995.2021.1989941.
    14. T. Schubatzky, C. Haagen-Schützenhöfer, R. Wackermann, C. Wöhlke, and S. Wildbichler, “Navigating the complexities of student understanding: Exploring the coherency of students’ conceptions about the greenhouse effect,” Sci. Educ., vol. 108, no. 4, pp. 1134–1161, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1002/sce.21867.
    15. K. Goniewicz, F. M. Burkle, and A. Khorram-Manesh, “Transforming global public health: Climate collaboration, political challenges, and systemic change,” J. Infect. Public Health, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 102615, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2024.102615.
    16. E. Gaisie and P. B. Cobbinah, “Planning for context-based climate adaptation: Flood management inquiry in Accra,” Environ. Sci. Policy, vol. 141, pp. 97–108, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.01.002.
    17. K. Labonté and V. C. St-Arnaud, “Development and validation of MACK-12: A short multidimensional climate knowledge scale,” PLOS Clim., vol. 4, no. 11, p. e0000600, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000600.
    18. D. Pramesti, R. M. Probosari, and N. Y. Indiyanti, “Effectiveness of project based learning low carbon STEM and discovery learning to improve creative thinking skills,” J. Innov. Educ. Cult. Res., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 445–456, 2022, doi: 10.46843/jiecr.v3i3.156.
    19. C.-C. Chang and Y.-K. Chen, “Educational values and challenges of i-STEM project-based learning: A mixed-methods study with data-transformation design,” Front. Psychol., vol. 13, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976724.
    20. Z. H. Wan, W. M. W. So, and Y. Zhan, “Developing and validating a scale of STEM project-based learning experience,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 599–615, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11165-020-09965-3.
    21. D. S. Vijayan, A. Sivasuriyan, P. Patchamuthu, and R. jayaseelan, “Thermal performance of energy-efficient buildings for sustainable development,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 29, no. 34, pp. 51130–51142, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-17602-3.
    22. M. Lackner et al., “Energy Efficiency: Comparison of Different Systems and Technologies BT - Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation,” M. Lackner, B. Sajjadi, and W.-Y. Chen, Eds., Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 515–613. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-84483-6_24.
    23. G. B. Petersen, S. Klingenberg, R. E. Mayer, and G. Makransky, “The virtual field trip: Investigating how to optimize immersive virtual learning in climate change education,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 2099–2115, Nov. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12991.
    24. J. Bentz, “Learning about climate change in, with and through art,” Clim. Change, vol. 162, no. 3, pp. 1595–1612, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10584-020-02804-4.
    25. R. R. Mohammadi, M. Saeidi, and A. Abdollahi, “Modelling the interrelationships among self-regulated learning components, critical thinking and reading comprehension by PLS-SEM: A mixed methods study,” System, vol. 117, p. 103120, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.system.2023.103120.
    26. S. Kono and M. Sato, “The potentials of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in leisure research,” J. Leis. Res., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 309–329, May 2023, doi: 10.1080/00222216.2022.2066492.
    27. J. Hair and A. Alamer, “Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example,” Res. Methods Appl. Linguist., vol. 1, no. 3, p. 100027, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027.
    28. A. A. D. Peny, A. Widodo, and R. Solihat, “Project-based learning and problem-based learning in improving climate change literacy of junior high school students in disaster-prone areas,” J. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 23, no. April, pp. 692–700, 2022, doi: 10.23960/jpmipa/v23i2.pp692-700.
    29. M. L. Hafitri and S. Efwinda, “Enhancing students’ learning outcomes and science process skills through STEM project-based learning on global warming topics,” J. Penelit. Pengemb. Pendidik. Fis., vol. 10, no. 1 SE-Articles, pp. 147–160, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.21009/1.10113.
    30. S. Feng, M. W. Mohd Shafiei, T. F. Ng, J. Ren, and Y. Jiang, “The intersection of economic growth and environmental sustainability in China: Pathways to achieving SDG,” Energy Strateg. Rev., vol. 55, p. 101530, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2024.101530.
    31. B. K. Singh et al., “Climate change impacts on plant pathogens, food security and paths forward,” Nat. Rev. Microbiol., vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 640–656, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41579-023-00900-7.
    32. L. Mehner, S. Rothenbusch, and S. Kauffeld, “How to maximize the impact of workplace training: a mixed-method analysis of social support, training transfer and knowledge sharing,” Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 201–217, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2024.2319082.
    33. S. A. Bozkurt, S. Aydoğan, F. Dursun Ergezen, and A. Türkoğlu, “A systematic review and sequential explanatory synthesis: Artificial intelligence in healthcare education, a case of nursing,” Int. Nurs. Rev., vol. 72, no. 2, p. e70018, Jun. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.70018.
    34. N. Sardana, S. Shekoohi, E. M. Cornett, and A. D. Kaye, “Chapter 6 - Qualitative and quantitative research methods,” A. D. Kaye, R. D. Urman, E. M. Cornett, and A. N. B. T.-S. U. and A. R. Edinoff, Eds., Academic Press, 2023, pp. 65–69. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-98814-8.00008-1.
    35. C. Q. Nguyen, A. M. T. Nguyen, and L. Ba Le, “Using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to assess the effects of entrepreneurial education on engineering students’s entrepreneurial intention,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 2122330, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2122330.
    36. D. Rosana, M. Ramadani, and K. Dewi, “The instrument for assessing the performance of science process skills based on Nature of Science (NOS),” J. Cakrawala Pendidik., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 435–445, 2017, doi: 10.21831/cp.v36i3.14731.
    37. D. Darmaji, A. Astalini, D. A. Kurniawan, and E. Triani, “The effect of science process skills of students argumentation skills,” J. Inov. Pendidik. IPA, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 78–88, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.21831/jipi.v8i1.49224.
    38. J. Lu, H. Si, J. Xu, and T. Xu, “An overview of applications and trends of STEM for learning effectiveness——An umbrella review based on 22 meta-analyses,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 48, p. 100712, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100712.
    39. J. E. DeWaters, C. Andersen, A. Calderwood, and S. E. Powers, “Improving climate literacy with project-based modules rich in educational rigor and relevance,” J. Geosci. Educ., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 469–484, Sep. 2014, doi: 10.5408/13-056.1.
    40. P. M. Kurup, R. Levinson, and X. Li, “Informed-decision regarding global warming and climate change among high school students in the United Kingdom,” Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 166–185, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s42330-020-00123-5.
    41. M. Kundariati, I. Ibrohim, F. Rohman, and S. Nida, “Navigating climate change education: A problem-oriented project-based learning in secondary schools,” Sci. Act., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 156–170, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1080/00368121.2025.2463653.