Emerging trends and effective strategies in STEM teacher professional development: A systematic review

Background characteristics of the TPD studies
Geographical location
Figure 4 shows the distribution of professional development studies by geographical location within China. Zhejiang and Hong Kong are the most studied locations, with five studies each. Shanghai follows with four studies. Chongqing has three studies, while Beijing has two studies. Several other locations, including Guangxi, Nanjing, Taiwan, Sichuan, Hunan, Guangdong, Chengdu, Shenzhen, and Henan, each have one study.

Distribution of STEM teacher professional development studies by geographical location.
Additionally, four studies are categorized under “Not Identified” locations. This distribution highlights a concentration of research in regions such as Zhejiang, Hong Kong, and Shanghai, which may indicate these areas’ established roles in educational research and development. Meanwhile, other regions show lower levels of research activity, suggesting varied regional engagement in professional development studies across China.
Sample groups
Figure 5 illustrates the sample sizes of STEM teacher professional development studies, categorized by the types of teachers involved. The largest sample group consists of pre-service teachers, with 1472 participants, indicating a substantial focus on preparing future educators for STEM teaching (Dan and Gary, 2018; Lin et al. 2022b). This is closely followed by the middle, secondary, and high school in-service teachers, with a sample size of 1195, highlighting a strong emphasis on professional development for educators actively teaching at these levels (Stonier and Adarkwah, 2023). Primary, secondary, and high school in-service teachers form another significant group, with a sample size of 1029, reflecting continued attention to STEM education across the broader K-12 spectrum (Wu and Zhang, 2022; Lin et al. 2023). The category for early childhood teachers, with 509 participants, and K-12 in-service teachers, with 368 participants, indicate moderate levels of focus, a hypothesis supported by scholars such as English (2019). Smaller sample sizes are observed for in-service primary teachers (85), unspecified in-service teachers (180), and primary and middle in-service teachers (12), suggesting these groups receive less research attention (Huang et al. 2022). The category labeled “Not explicitly mentioned” indicates there are participants whose specific educational stage was not categorized. This distribution reveals a strategic emphasis on pre-service preparation and in-service professional development, particularly for middle and school teachers, and pre-service preparation and in-service professional development, particularly for teachers at the middle and high school levels, where the impact on STEM education is considered most critical.

This figure illustrates the total sample size of STEM teacher professional development studies categorized by their target educational levels, ranging from early childhood to K-12 in-service teachers.
Mode of training
Figure 6 demonstrates the distribution of STEM professional development training modes across China. The data reveals a strong preference for physical training, with 26 projects engaging approximately 4331 participants, underscoring the continued emphasis on hands-on, interactive learning experiences. In comparison, online training is utilized in fewer instances, with three projects involving around 640 participants, indicating its growing but still limited role in professional development. The ‘U/I’ (Unidentified) category represents an intermediate level, with six projects but without specific sampling data provided. This suggests that while physical training remains the predominant approach to STEM professional development in China, online training is emerging as a viable alternative, especially for reaching broader audiences. Unidentified data shows where more research is needed to fully understand the training methods used in this context.

The chart categorizes the training projects based on their delivery methods, such as online modules and in-person workshops.
Subject domain
Figure 7 shows a distinct preference for integrated STEM education, with 24 studies categorized under this approach, highlighting its dominance in professional development research. This method combines two or more STEM disciplines and, which combines two or more STEM disciplines, is favored for preparing educators to teach STEM holistically (Ong et al. 2020; Stonier and Adarkwah, 2023). In comparison, general STEM pedagogy, focusing on broader, non-disciplinary teaching methods, was examined in 3 studies, suggesting a limited exploration of this approach (Chan, 2023). Additionally, individual STEM subjects, such as specific science or technology disciplines, were the focus of 4 studies, indicating a targeted educational focus within professional development programs (Wu and Zhang, 2022). This distribution demonstrates a strong trend towards interdisciplinary learning in STEM education, reflecting a contemporary emphasis on equipping teachers with the skills to integrate multiple STEM fields effectively in their instruction. The emphasis on integrated approaches likely aligns with current educational strategies to foster comprehensive STEM literacy among students.

The number of STEM professional development (PD) studies categorized by their focus on integrated STEM education, general STEM pedagogy, and individual STEM subjects.
Data sources
Figure 8 shows the distribution of studies by data collection methods in STEM education research, highlighting a range of empirical approaches. Grounded theory, primarily through interviews, is the most frequently used qualitative method, with seven studies (e.g., Luo et al. 2023; Lyu et al. 2022) providing deep insights into educators’ professional development experiences. Self-efficacy surveys are also prominent in two studies (e.g., Geng et al. 2019; Lin et al. 2024), emphasizing their importance in assessing teachers’ confidence in STEM disciplines. Several studies combine different data sources to enrich findings; for example, Huang et al. (2022) used a mixed-method approach to analyze teachers’ STEM literacy quantitatively, complemented by qualitative feedback. Similarly, Lin et al. (2024) combined survey data with interviews to explore practical online courses, highlighting diverse expectations among Chinese STEM students.

a Quantitative data sources b Qualitative data sources c Mixed method data sources used in studies.
The use of varied data sources, including classroom observations, teacher surveys, and reflective practices, reflects the research community’s commitment to a holistic understanding of the impacts of professional development. This methodological diversity, as seen in the mixed-method approaches of Lin et al. (2024) and Lyu et al. (2022b), underscores a rigorous exploration of the complexities in STEM education, balancing quantitative breadth with qualitative depth for a comprehensive perspective on teacher development. The figure maps out the research methods and highlights the balance between quantitative and qualitative approaches, essential for understanding professional development in STEM education.
Objectives Foci in Professional Development
These studies predominantly aim to enhance pedagogical skills in STEM education, focusing on methodologies that can be directly applied in classroom settings. Many studies, such as Stonier and Adarkwah (2023) and Ong et al. (2020), have focused on developing teachers’ pedagogical skills, particularly in STEM education. This includes improving teachers’ abilities to integrate STEM subjects effectively into their teaching practices. A significant number of studies also aim to improve teachers’ self-efficacy and belief in their ability, the belief in their abilities to teach STEM subjects effectively. For example, Lin et al. (2022b) and Lyu et al. (2022) emphasized boosting teachers’ self-confidence in teaching STEM subjects. This is critical, as self-efficacy can significantly impact teachers’ willingness to engage with and effectively teach complex STEM content. This is crucial in a field often perceived as challenging to teach and learn.
Additionally, the Chinese studies emphasize the need for interdisciplinary integration and competency development among STEM teachers. For instance, Zeng et al. (2024) proposed strategies for enhancing interdisciplinary knowledge and skills to address the shortage of STEAM teachers in China. Li and Li (2023) highlighted the need to expand professional teams and strengthen STEAM curricula integration support systems for expanding professional teams and strengthening support systems for STEAM curricula integration. This suggests a growing recognition of the importance of fostering interdisciplinary competencies to adapt to the evolving demands of STEM education.
Additionally, fostering interdisciplinary communication and technological know-how among teachers is a recurring theme. Studies such as those conducted by Huang et al. (2022) and Lin et al. (2023) highlighted the importance of interdisciplinary communication skills and technological knowledge. This reflects the evolving nature of STEM education, which increasingly demands the integration of diverse knowledge areas and applying technology in teaching. Chinese studies, such as those by Jian et al. (2023) and Song and Guan (2022), further emphasize the importance of interdisciplinary competence by proposing models for its development and suggesting practical paths for integrating technology in teaching. This finding demonstrates the need for teachers not only to understand individual STEM disciplines but also to integrate them effectively, using technology as a facilitator of learning. Several studies also explore new pathways for curriculum reform and pre-service teacher training. Jian et al. (2023) and Zhang and Wu (2021) propose reforms in pre-service training programs to foster innovation and cross-disciplinary teaching, while Dong (2016) identifies challenges and strategies for implementing STEM education in Chinese primary and secondary schools. This highlights a broader shift towards adapting educational practices to better prepare teachers for the complexities of contemporary STEM education.
These studies suggest a multifaceted approach to professional development in STEM education in China, addressing the improvement of specific teaching skills, the overall confidence of teachers in STEM disciplines, and the promotion of interdisciplinary competencies to meet the needs of a dynamic educational landscape.
Outcomes
The outcomes reported indicate a significant improvement in teachers’ understanding and implementation of various STEM methodologies. Several studies have reported significant improvements in teachers’ grasp and application of STEM teaching approaches. For instance, Ong et al. (2020) observed notable advancements in teachers’ postintervention implementation of the STEM-based 5E Inquiry Learning Model. Many projects have successfully heightened teachers’ interest in STEM subjects. Stonier and Adarkwah (2023) reported that their sessions promoted participants’ interest and self-efficacy in STEM. A common outcome across these studies is the improved integration of STEM disciplines in teaching practices. For example, Liu et al. (2014) suggested that exposure to engineering role models significantly increases female teachers’ confidence in STEM fields, indicating effective interdisciplinary teaching. These studies consistently reported an increase in teaching competencies post-training. For instance, Huang et al. (2022) highlighted the significant improvement in teachers’ STEM literacy, particularly regarding technological and environmental knowledge. Additional studies have reinforced these findings. For example, Zeng et al. (2024) demonstrated that extending training periods and providing targeted professional development programs can significantly improve the interdisciplinary competencies of STEAM teachers. Li and Li (2023) emphasized the need for expanding the professional team of STEAM educators and strengthening their integration competencies to avoid formalistic curriculum integration.
Moreover, Jian et al. (2023) proposed reforming pre-service training curricula by promoting project-based learning and cultivating practical wisdom, which can further enhance STEM teaching skills. Peng and Zhu (2020) identified two orientations in teachers’ understanding of STEM education, suggesting that better support for instructional and disciplinary approaches is necessary. Gang and Qiongyuan (2023) found that leading STEM teachers developed their professional abilities primarily through solving real-world STEM problems, underscoring the need for practice-oriented development opportunities. Huang et al. (2020) recommended integrating STEM subjects into teacher education curriculums to improve STEM literacy among pre-service teachers. Zhang et al. (2023) proposed reforms to pre-service teacher training to foster innovative STEAM teaching abilities, while Dong (2016) highlighted the importance of developing systematic STEM teacher certification and training programs. Finally, Song and Guan (2022) emphasized the development of interdisciplinary competencies through school support, collaborative communities, and technology-enhanced training.
Key outcomes include increased interest in STEM subjects among teachers, better integration of STEM disciplines, and enhanced teaching competencies. These outcomes collectively suggest that extending the training duration, fostering interdisciplinary integration, and providing targeted support are crucial for advancing STEM education. The overall findings demonstrate a positive impact of professional development on improving STEM teaching capabilities in China, with a promising trend towards more well-equipped and confident STEM educators.
Methodologies and Sample Sizes
Table 1 presents the various methodologies and sample sizes used across the 31 studies. These methodologies span from mixed methods and qualitative to quantitative approaches, illustrating the diverse analytical perspectives adopted in these studies. For instance, some studies, such as those conducted by Stonier and Adarkwah (2023) and Ong et al. (2020), have utilized mixed methods and experimental designs to comprehensively assess professional development’s impact, respectively, to comprehensively assess the impact of professional development on STEM teaching practices. Additional studies, such as those by Zeng et al. (2019) and Li (2019), employed qualitative methodologies to explore interdisciplinary integration and curriculum reform, contributing to a broader understanding of teacher training challenges and strategies. Sample sizes also vary significantly, with some studies involving large cohorts, such as Lin et al. (2022b) with 483 participants and Huang et al. (2020) with 1,221 pre-service teachers, while others focus on smaller groups, like Lyu et al. (2022) with only 12 participants. Some studies have not explicitly mentioned sample sizes, which suggests a need for more standardized reporting in this field. This diversity in methodology and sample size enhances the breadth of insights derived from these studies, providing a wide lens through which the objectives and outcomes of STEM teachers’ professional development in China can be understood.
Overall Trends
Research has shown a trend toward enhancing teacher confidence in STEM and developing integrated teaching methods that combine various STEM disciplines. The overall trend in professional development projects for STEM integration in China reveals a strong emphasis on enhancing teacher confidence in STEM and developing integrated teaching methodologies that combine various STEM disciplines. This trend is reflected in studies such as Stonier and Adarkwah (2023), who focused on improving self-efficacy in STEM, and Ong et al. (2020), who highlighted the significant improvement in teachers’ understanding and implementation of the STEM-based 5E Inquiry Learning Model. The emphasis is not only on theoretical knowledge but also on practical, hands-on experience. For instance, Lin et al. (2022b) emphasized the importance of teachers’ epistemic fluency and interdisciplinary communication in advancing their technological pedagogical engineering knowledge.
Similarly, Huang et al. (2022) reported that teachers with strong scientific knowledge need to enhance their problem-solving skills, further supporting the practical application of knowledge in teaching scenarios. Chinese studies, such as those by Zeng et al. (2019) and Li (2019), underscore the importance of interdisciplinary competencies and the need for expanded professional teams and robust support systems to integrate STEAM curricula effectively. Additionally, research by Jian et al. (2023) and Peng and Zhu (2020) highlights STEM teachers’ challenges in curriculum integration. It suggests pathways for reform, including project-based learning and collaborative innovation.
These studies indicate a shift toward a more dynamic and integrative approach to STEM education in professional development projects, focusing on enhancing teacher confidence and applying theoretical knowledge in practical teaching environments. Including new methodologies and training models, such as the “STEAM+“ framework proposed by Zhang and Wu (2021), demonstrates the ongoing evolution in teaching strategies emphasizing creativity, innovation, and interdisciplinary learning. These findings highlight the growing emphasis on multifaceted STEM education in China, focusing on both the pedagogical and content knowledge aspects of teaching and the need for ongoing professional development in these areas.
Professional development approaches in the STEM domain
When exploring the professional development landscape within STEM education, it is clear that the approaches used are as dynamic as they are diverse (see Table 2). Drawing from the insights of Cheng and Yeh (2022), the impact of professional development on STEM teachers’ competencies and practices is vividly captured across several dimensions. The tapestry of PD strategies is not a static picture but a dynamic interplay of approaches designed to enrich the educator’s toolkit (see Table 2). Chinese studies, such as those by Zeng et al. (2019) and Li (2019), emphasize the importance of interdisciplinary integration and the development of specialized training models to address the specific needs of STEAM educators. The tapestry of PD strategies, from mixed methods to experimental designs, enhances the educator’s toolkit. For example, studies such as those by Stonier and Adarkwah (2023) and Ong et al. (2020) highlight the influence of methodologies on teacher motivation and pedagogical effectiveness. These approaches, from practical hands-on STEM activities to more theoretical models such as the STEM-based 5E Inquiry Learning Model, offer experiential learning and enhance teachers’ understanding and integration of STEM subjects. Simultaneously, in the Chinese context, the focus on pragmatic education practices, such as grounded theory methodology and structural equation modeling (Lin et al. 2022b), underlines a rigorous approach to teacher development. This commitment is mirrored in pursuing STEM literacy, where mixed-mode research (Huang et al. 2022) and diverse case studies broaden the understanding of teachers’ attitudes and confidence. The recent study by Jian et al. (2023) further reinforces the necessity of project-based learning and practical wisdom cultivation as core elements of effective STEM professional development.
Collectively, these methods contribute to a well-rounded and empowered teaching force ready to navigate the complexities of modern education. In addition, the integration of online and remote training platforms, as explored by Wu and Zhang (2022), aligns with the evolving digital landscape, providing teachers with the tools to meet future educational challenges. Moreover, collaborative learning and partnerships, such as those highlighted in studies by Geng et al. (2019), reflect a communal spirit in education, emphasizing the importance of shared learning and innovation. Integrating online and remote training platforms aligns with the evolving digital landscape, allowing educators to prepare for future challenges. Additionally, including reflective practices, such as those advocated by Zhang and Wu (2021), indicates a commitment to continuous improvement and adaptability, which is crucial for an ever-changing educational environment.
Finally, the focus on reflective practices, as seen in implementing frameworks such as ODR (Observe-Discuss-Reflect), signals a dedication to continuous improvement and adaptability, which is crucial in an ever-changing educational environment (Huang et al. 2022). This combined view underscores that professional development in STEM education is about acquiring new skills and fostering a culture of continuous learning, collaboration, and innovation. These approaches, especially in the context of China, are shaping a generation of STEM educators who are competent, dynamic, and responsive to future needs.
In reviewing the professional development landscape in STEM education, a clear emphasis on teacher collaboration emerges, a theme resonant with global educational trends. For example, the approach highlighted in the study by Geng et al. (2019) underscores the effectiveness of collaborative learning and innovation in the classroom. This joint learning method goes beyond knowledge exchange; it builds a community among educators, encouraging creative and critical thinking as teachers from different fields collaborate on lesson plans and project-based learning. Furthermore, the pivotal role of experiential learning is evident in the application of hands-on activities and inquiry-based models such as the 5E Inquiry Learning Model. This approach, as shown in studies such as those by Stonier and Adarkwah (2023) and Ong et al. (2022), is instrumental in deepening teachers’ understanding of STEM subjects, demonstrating the value of learning by doing. Chinese studies, such as those by Zeng et al. (2019) and Li (2019), further highlighted the need for interdisciplinary integration and expanding professional teams to support collaborative teaching methods. Adopting frameworks such as ODR highlights the significance of reflective practices in professional development. As noted in studies such as Huang et al. (2022), this thoughtful approach enables educators to critically examine and evolve their teaching styles and methodologies, fostering informed and effective teaching practices.
Moreover, integrating digital technologies in teacher training, such as the development of online platforms (Lin et al. 2023), reflects an adaptation to the evolving educational landscape, indicating a forward-thinking approach to teacher development. Studies by Wu and Zhang (2022) support this by showcasing the effectiveness of remote human-computer interaction platforms in enhancing STEM teacher training. In essence, the professional development landscape in STEM education, particularly in China, is characterized by a fusion of traditional and modern practices. Recent research by Jian et al. (2023) and Peng and Zhu (2020) advocates using project-based learning and collaborative innovation to strengthen this approach. It is a dynamic approach aimed at shaping not only knowledgeable educators but also adaptable, collaborative, and prepared for the challenges of modern education (e.g., Geng et al. 2019; Stonier and Adarkwah, 2023; Ong et al. 2020; Huang et al. 2022; Lin et al. 2023).
Figure 9 presents a comprehensive overview of the professional development landscape within STEM education, highlighting various approaches employed to enhance teaching practices. Integrated STEM (iSTEM) instruction leads the way with five studies emphasizing interdisciplinary methods that integrate various STEM fields. STEM literacy and self-efficacy are also prominently featured, with four studies focusing on building teachers’ confidence and competence in STEM subjects. Reflective learning approaches, such as the ODR framework and online and remote STEM teachers’ training, were covered in 2 studies each, underscoring the importance of reflective practices and adapting to digital learning environments. Interdisciplinary communication is another key area, with three studies highlighting its role in promoting effective collaboration across different STEM fields. Other approaches, including hands-on STEM activities, the STEM-based 5E Inquiry Learning Model, technological pedagogical engineering knowledge (TPEK), and the collaborative design of STEM activities, are represented by 1 study each, reflecting a commitment to experiential learning, technological integration, and collaborative design in STEM education. Additional studies emphasize curriculum integration and reflection, pre-service teacher training reform, and competency development through grounded theory analysis, each contributing to a diverse professional development landscape.

Each bar represents the number of studies that have utilized a particular approach, providing a visual comparison of their prevalence.
This analysis reveals a broad spectrum of methodologies within STEM professional development, each playing a pivotal role in advancing educational practices. The diverse range of approaches underscores the field’s commitment to embracing various strategies that enhance professional growth and support the continuous evolution of STEM education.
Influence of PD Approaches and Moderating Factors on STEM Teaching Outcomes
The analysis of 31 studies on STEM education professional development in China identified key factors that consistently affect project outcomes. While the specific predictors or moderating variables such as project duration, teacher experience, or region within China are not uniformly detailed across all the studies, some recurring themes and factors emerge as influencing the effectiveness of these PD initiatives.
-
1.
Teacher efficacy and interdisciplinary communication: Improving teachers’ self-efficacy, particularly in interdisciplinary communication, enhances their confidence and directly impacts their teaching practices. Teachers with higher self-efficacy are likelier to adopt innovative teaching strategies, leading to improved student engagement and better learning outcomes in STEM subjects. Lin et al. (2023) indicated that teachers’ self-efficacy, particularly in interdisciplinary communication and epistemic fluency, plays a significant role in the success of integrated STEM (iSTEM) education. Chinese studies, such as those by Zeng et al. (2019) and Li (2019), further emphasized the importance of building interdisciplinary competencies, suggesting targeted strategies for improving communication and integration skills among STEM educators. The ability of teachers to communicate across disciplines and understand various subject matters profoundly impacts the quality of STEM instruction.
-
2.
Challenges and Opportunities in Implementation: The study by Lyu et al. (2022) highlights the challenges and opportunities experienced by teachers in implementing integrated STEM education. Additionally, Jian et al. (2023) and Peng and Zhu (2020) underscore the complexities of STEM implementation, noting challenges such as lack of resources, inadequate curriculum integration, and insufficient professional skills, particularly in regional and local contexts. This points to the importance of understanding the specific context and challenges unique to each school or region in China, suggesting that regional differences might moderate the outcomes of professional development programs. Regional differences, such as access to resources and support, significantly influence the effectiveness of STEM TPD programs. Teachers in rural or underfunded regions may lack STEM-trained staff and insufficient technological infrastructure, which hinders their ability to build competencies and adopt effective STEM teaching practices. This suggests that regional disparities must be addressed to ensure equitable access to high-quality STEM TPD across China. The duration of STEM TPD programs also plays a crucial role in their success. More extended programs tend to give teachers more time to deeply engage with STEM content, leading to sustained improvement in teaching practices. In contrast, shorter programs may not provide enough time for teachers to fully integrate new pedagogical approaches, limiting their impact on classroom practices.
-
3.
Gender Differences in STEM Literacy: The findings of Huang et al. (2021) on teachers’ STEM literacy and its relationship with their subject background and gender indicate that these factors can influence professional development outcomes. Chinese study by Huang et al. (2020) further explores the nuances of gender differences, particularly in problem-solving abilities and attitudes toward STEM, highlighting the need to address these disparities through tailored PD programs. For example, gender differences in self-efficacy for problem-solving skills in STEM fields were noted, which could impact the effectiveness of professional development efforts.
-
4.
Expectations and Perceptions of Online Courses: The study by Lin et al. (2023) on the expectations of practical online courses among STEM college students reflects the growing importance of digital literacy and online pedagogical skills in professional development. This is complemented by Wu and Zhang (2022), who explored remote human-computer interaction platforms and found that these technologies play a crucial role in enhancing teachers’ online teaching competencies and meeting evolving digital learning demands. Adapting to online teaching and its expectations can significantly influence the effectiveness of professional development programs.
-
5.
Teacher Beliefs and Knowledge Base: The study of intrinsic challenges to STEM instructional practices based on teachers’ beliefs and knowledge (Dong et al. 2020) suggests that teachers’ beliefs about STEM education and their knowledge base can predict their instructional challenges. New insights from Mao et al. (2021) emphasize the impact of school type and location on the professional development of STEM teachers, underscoring the importance of tailored approaches that consider these contextual factors. This implies that professional development programs need to address these belief systems and knowledge gaps to be effective.
-
6.
Integration of Engineering into Science Education: Exploring teachers’ perceptions of integrating engineering into science education (Zhan et al. 2021) sheds light on the need for high-quality training programs and teachers’ understanding of engineering practices in STEM education. Moreover, the study by Song and Guan (2022) highlights the development of interdisciplinary competence models, focusing on integrating engineering principles with science education, thus reinforcing the need for a comprehensive approach to teaching STEM subjects. Overall, these factors, teacher efficacy, regional disparities, and project duration, interact to shape the outcomes of TPD programs, highlighting the need for tailored professional development approaches that address these variables to maximize the effectiveness of STEM education in China.
In conclusion, while there is no single set of consistent predictors across all the studies, factors such as teacher efficacy, interdisciplinary communication skills, regional and contextual challenges, gender differences in STEM literacy, expectations about online education, teacher beliefs, and knowledge bases, and the integration of engineering concepts in science education emerge as significant influencers of the outcomes of professional development projects in STEM education in China. The influence of each factor was gauged based on its recurrence, emphasis within the study narratives, and discussion of outcomes and effectiveness. Figure 10 represents a narrative on the multifaceted nature of professional development within STEM education in China. This figure underscores the prevalence of themes such as Teacher Efficacy and Interdisciplinary Communication, with several studies indicating the critical role of teacher confidence and cross-disciplinary dialogue in effective STEM teaching. The challenges and opportunities in implementation, addressed in the Chinese studies, further reveal the intricate balance of difficulties and prospects faced in executing STEM education initiatives. STEM literacy and gender differences remain prominent, with additional studies delving into the dynamics between teacher and student gender and their influence on STEM engagement and literacy levels. Expectations in online education, explored in several studies, reflect the evolving scenario of digital learning and its impact on STEM pedagogy. Teachers’ beliefs and knowledge bases continue to be a focal point, particularly in studies that emphasize the importance of addressing diverse belief systems and knowledge gaps to enhance teaching efficacy. Finally, the integration of engineering in science education, highlighted in Chinese research, marks a continued evolution in traditional educational frameworks, underscoring the need for comprehensive, interdisciplinary approaches to STEM education. Collectively, these themes paint a comprehensive picture of the current state and transformative potential of STEM professional development in China.

This graph delineates the frequency with which various factors are addressed in studies concerning STEM educational PD outcomes in China.
link