CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 104STEM EducationEducational Methods and OutcomesEducation and Critical Thinking Development

Effectiveness of STEM Learning Based on Design Thinking in Improving Critical Thinking Skills in Science Learning: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Zulyusri, Zulyusri, Santosa, Tomi Apra, Festiyed, Festiyed, Yerimadesi, Yerimadesi, Yohandri, Yohandri, Razak, Abdul, Sofianora, Aulia·2023·Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA
DOI 10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.3709
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of Design Thinking-based STEM learning in improving students' critical thinking skills in science learning. This research is a type of meta-analysis research. Data sources in the study came from 100 national and international journals published from 2017-2023. Search for data sources through google scholar, Eric, Wiley, Taylor of Francis, Sciencedirect, and ProQuest. Data collection techniques through direct observation through the journal database. The keywords used in the search are STEM model, Design Thinking, Critical thinking skills and Science learning. Data analysis technique is quantitative descriptive analysis with JSAP application. The effect size of each study on the STEM learning model based on design thinking in science learning is 0.84 with large criteria. The results of the study can be concluded that the STEM learning model based on design thinking is effective for improving critical thinking skills in science learning. STEM learning model based on design thinking is very good to be applied in science learning in Indonesia

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.3709

Cites

49 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several meta-analyses have examined DT interventions but many have not differentiated between formal and informal models.

    “Although several meta-analyses have examined DT interventions, many have not differentiated between formal and informal models.”

    From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Zulyusri et al., 2023

    The Method section identifies this paper as a meta-analysis, and the Results section says it analyzes 30 studies of design-thinking-based STEM learning. It therefore provides one example of a relevant meta-analysis, but it does not establish that several meta-analyses examined DT interventions or that many failed to distinguish formal from informal models. Its listed mediator variables do not include that distinction. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Zulyusri et al. (2023) analyzed DT interventions globally but primarily focused on critical thinking and did not perform moderator variable analysis.

    “Similarly, another study conducted by Zulyusri et al., (2023) analyzed DT interventions globally but primarily focused on fostering critical thinking.”

    From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Zulyusri et al., 2023

    The Abstract describes a meta-analysis of design-thinking-based STEM learning focused on students’ critical thinking, using national and international journals; it does not establish that the interventions were analyzed globally. The Results and Table 6 report an analysis of mediator variables, including sample size, year, education level, and research source, contrary to the claim that no moderator-variable analysis was performed. That latter assertion does not appear in the verbatim citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • There is a lack of studies assessing the impact of DT interventions on creativity on a global scale.

    “Furthermore, there is a lack of studies assessing the impact of DT interventions on creativity on a global scale.”

    From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Zulyusri et al., 2023

    The Introduction says prior studies have not specifically established the effect of design-thinking-based STEM models, which supports a general research-gap claim. It does not identify a global lack of studies assessing creativity as an outcome; the paper’s meta-analysis instead examines critical thinking. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Many prior studies have not conducted moderator variable analysis to understand factors influencing the strength of observed effects.

    “Many of these studies have not conducted moderator variable analysis to better understand the influence of various factors on the strength of the observed effects (Suprapto, 2023;Zulyusri et al., 2023).”

    From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Zulyusri et al., 2023

    The Results and Table 6 report this paper’s own analysis of mediator variables and their relationship to effect size. Our copy does not say that many prior studies omitted moderator-variable analysis; searches for that research-gap claim found no supporting passage. No page numbers were provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Course duration plays a vital role in informal DT models, influencing students' learning outcomes.

    “Course duration also plays a vital role in informal DT models, influencing the learning outcomes of the students.”

    From A meta-analysis to explore the role of design thinking in enhancing creativity as learning outcomes in STEM education (2026) · cites this paper as Zulyusri et al., 2023

    The Introduction discusses design-thinking-based STEM learning and student outcomes, but does not address course duration. A search for course duration and informal design-thinking models found no passage linking duration to learning outcomes; the Results instead discuss sample size, research year, research source, and education level as potential moderators. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Daga, A. T., Wahyudin, D., & Susilana, R. (2022). An Investigation of Developing Indonesian Elementary School Students' Critical Thinking Skills: A Literature Review. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 14(3), 1752-1766. Retrieved from http://ijci.wcci- international.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/93
  2. Ichsan, Santosa, T. A., Ilwandri, Sofianora, A., & Yastanti, U. (2022). Efektivitas Evaluasi Model CIPP Dalam Pembelajaran IPA di Indonesia: Meta- Analisis. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Konseling, 5(2), 1349- 1358. https://doi.org/10.31004/jpdk.v5i2.13435 · DOI
  3. Ichsan, Suhaimi, Amalia Nur Kodzijah, Santosa Tomi Apra, & Yulianti Sisi. (2022). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Problem Based Learning Berbasis TPACK Terhadap Ketrampilan Literasi Sains Dalam Pembelajaran IPA Siswa Tingkat SD Sampai SMA: Sebuah Meta-Analisis. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Konseling, 4(5), 2173-2181. https://doi.org/10.31004/jpdk.v4i5.6931 · DOI
  4. Kanmaz, A. (2022). Middle School Teachers' Critical Thinking Skills and Awareness Towards Teaching Critical Thinking Skills. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 9(4), 1648-1671. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1353469
  5. Topsakal, İ., Yalçın, S. A., & Çakır, Z. (2022). The Effect of Problem-based STEM Education on the Students' Critical Thinking Tendencies and Their Perceptions for Problem Solving Skills. Science Education International, 33(2), 136-145. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v33.i2. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zulyusri, Z., Santosa, T. A., Festiyed, F., Yerimadesi, Y., Yohandri, Y., Razak, A., & Sofianora, A.
Affiliations
Universitas Negeri Padang (ID)
ORCID
Venue
Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA
Publisher
Universitas Mataram
Published
2023-06-25
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
112-119
ISSN
  • 2407-795X (ISSN-L)
  • 2460-2582
DOI
10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.3709
OpenAlex
W4382071564
Cited by
48
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 21
FWCI
2.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Universitas Negeri Padang
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › STEM Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
Keywords
STEM learning, design thinking, critical thinking skills, science learning, teaching effectiveness, effect size

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review