The axiological foundations of innovation in STEM education – A systematic review and ethical meta-analysis

Abstract

Introduction: Values are crucial in decision-making, including processes related to science and technology, despite scientists often being unaware of them. Because a goal of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is to foster innovation, values have become fundamental in directing science and technology policies and shaping organizational cultures to leverage innovation. However, most research on STEM education has focused on improving performance or access to STEM education while overlooking its axiological configuration. This study analyzes the different value systems emerging in the current literature on STEM higher education and identifies the relevant stakeholders. Method: In this systematic review and ethical meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the most prominent studies on STEM education and its core values. We followed a Ricoeur-inspired hermeneutical methodology using Atlas ti 8.4.4. Values are identified and classified using a systematic approach to integrate axiological landscapes. Results: The literature does not explicitly discuss the value of STEM education for innovation. However, social values appear to be at the intersection and the cornerstone of basic, economic, aesthetic, and epistemic values, as most social values also manifest these four systems. The most common manifestation of the value system is the capability approach to justice, followed by the beauty of recognition and success and, in third place, racism and social disparities. The analyzed literature emphasizes STEM education's social, political, and economic determinants. However, there is an epistemic gap in the indispensable value of innovating and assessing STEM education. Conclusions: We propose an organizational culture model for STEM education that considers the goals, ends, values, and behaviors of students, teachers, educational institutions, and the government. This model can help fill the axiological gaps in STEM education.