Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Saggi e ricerche

No. 1 (2026): Higher Education for Digital and Soft Skills: Innovative Approaches

Technology-mediated collaborative approaches to science teaching in secondary schools

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/exioa1-2026oa23215
Submitted
luglio 6, 2026
Published
2026-07-21

Abstract

This paper presents an educational study on technology-mediated collaborative approaches for science teaching in upper secondary education. The research describes the implementation of a learning scenario on the topic of acids and bases, carried out during the 2023/2024 school year in a fourth-year class of an Italian technical secondary school specializing in chemistry. The study adopts a pre-post mixed-methods design aimed at investigating the impact of the intervention on students’ attitudes toward science, learning outcomes, collaborative skills, and further effects on both students and the teacher. The instructional design combined collaborative peer review, heuristic lessons, laboratory activities, and the use of digital tools such as PhET simulations, Mentimeter, and Padlet. Quantitative findings show a significant improvement in learning outcomes, while no statistically significant changes emerged in students’ attitudes toward science or in their collaborative skills. However, qualitative data highlight students’ engagement, especially during contextualized activities supported by technologies that helped visualize scientific processes and foster reflection. Additional benefits also emerged in terms of teacher mediation and professional development. Although further studies with larger samples and in different contexts are needed, the study provides useful insights for teaching practice: the integration of collaboration, technological support, and content contextualization appears to support scientific learning, although it likely requires longer timeframes and more structured planning to have a lasting impact on collaborative attitudes and skills.

References

  1. Al-Balushi S. M., Martin-Hansen L., & Song Y. (Eds.) (2023). Reforming science teacher education programs in the STEM era: International and comparative perspectives. Springer Nature.
  2. Bonaiuti G., Calvani A., & Ranieri M. (2016). Fondamenti di didattica: Teoria e prassi dei dispositivi formativi. Carocci.
  3. Braun V., & Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2): 77-101. Doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
  4. Ceregini D., Persico F., Pozzi L., & Sarti L. (2019). The 4Ts game to develop teachers’ competences for the design of collaborative learning. In: D. Burgos et al. (Eds.). HELMeTO 2019 (CCIS 1091, pp. 192-205). Doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-31284-8_15.
  5. Correia A. P., Koehler N., Thompson A., & Phye G. (2019). The application of PhET simulation to teach gas behavior on the submicroscopic level: Secondary school students’ perceptions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 37(2): 193-217. Doi: 10.1080/02635143.2018.1487834.
  6. Day S. P., & Bryce T. G. K. (2013). The benefits of cooperative learning to socio-scientific discussion in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 35(9): 1533-1560. Doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.642324.
  7. Doz D. (2020). L’insegnamento della conservazione dell’energia meccanica tramite le simulazioni online PhET. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1): 91-98. Doi: 10.17471/2499-4324/1131.
  8. Etikan I., Musa S. A., & Alkassim R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11.
  9. Fiorentini C. (2018). Rinnovare l’insegnamento delle scienze: Aspetti storici, epistemologici, psicologici, pedagogici e didattici. Aracne.
  10. Fraser B. J. (1978). Development of a test of science related attitudes. Science Education, 62(4): 509-515. Doi: 10.1002/sce.3730620411.
  11. Haynes M., Brown A., Nichols K., & Musofer R. P. (2023). Measurement of student attitudes to science and association with inquiry-based learning in regional schools. International Journal of Science Education, 45(8): 593-612. Doi: 10.1080/09500693.2023.2168138.
  12. Jeong H., Hmelo-Silver C. E., & Jo K. (2019). Ten years of computer-supported collaborative learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005-2014. Educational Research Review, 28, 100284. Doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100284.
  13. Lajoie S. P. (2000). Breaking camp to find new summits. Computers as cognitive tools, 2.
  14. Le H., Janssen J., & Wubbels T. (2018). Collaborative learning practices: Teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1): 103-122. Doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2016.1259389.
  15. Lucisano P., & Rubat Du Merac E. E. M. (2019). Soft skills self-evaluation questionnaire (3SQ): Caratteristiche e proprietà psichometriche / Soft skills self-evaluation questionnaire (3SQ): Characteristics and psychometric proprieties. In: Training actions and evaluation processes. Atti del Convegno Internazionale SIRD (pp. 609-622). Pensa MultiMedia.
  16. Mao P., Cai Z., He J., Chen X., & Fan X. (2021). The relationship between attitude toward science and academic achievement in science: A three-level meta-analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 784068. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.784068.
  17. OECD (2016). PISA 2015 results (Vol. 1): Excellence and equity in education. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/9789264266490-en.
  18. OECD (2017). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving (Revised ed.). OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/9789264281820-en.
  19. OECD (2023). PISA 2022 results (Vol. 1): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/53f23881-en.
  20. Palmerio L., & Caponera E. (2021). IEA TIMSS 2019. I risultati degli studenti italiani in matematica e scienze. FrancoAngeli.
  21. Panciroli C., & Rivoltella P. C. (2025). Didattica delle STEAM con gli EAS. Morcelliana.
  22. Potvin P., Hasni A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitudes toward science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Stud. Sci. Educ., 50: 85-129. Doi. 10.1080/03057267.2014.881626.
  23. Pozzi F., Asensio-Pérez J. I., & Persico D. (2016). The case for multiple representations in the learning design life cycle. In: B. Gros, Kinshuk, & M. Maina (Eds.). The future of ubiquitous learning: Learning designs for emerging pedagogies (pp. 171-196). Springer.
  24. Ranieri M. (2022). Competenze digitali per insegnare: Modelli e proposte operative. Carocci.
  25. Roffi A. (2024). Attività collaborative e tecnologie digitali per le discipline scientifiche: un approccio alla co-progettazione didattica nella scuola secondaria superiore. In: V. Boffo, F. Togni (edited by). La formazione alla ricerca. Il dottorato fra qualità e prospettive future, pp. 229-237, Firenze University Press. Doi: 10.36253/979-12-215-0504-7.24.
  26. Ranieri M., Sangrà A. (Eds.). Exploring self-regulated learning in digital education: Learning design, technology and practice (pp. 59-90). Pensa MultiMedia.
  27. Scippo S., & Rubat Du Mérac E. (2021). Criterion validation of the scales of autonomy, collaboration, empathy, problem-solving and self-confidence of the 3SQ: Soft Skills Self-evaluation Questionnaire adapted for lower secondary school. Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS Journal), 24, 9.
  28. Tocchioni V., Galluccio C., Morabito M. F., & Petrucci A. (2022). Students enrolled in STEM discipline in Italy: Patterns of retention, dropout and switch. In: Book of the short paper SIS 2022 (pp. 0-0). Pearson.
  29. Trinchero R., & Robasto D. (2019). I mixed methods nella ricerca educativa. Mondadori Università.
  30. Vygotskij L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4.