Indonesian Primary School Teachers’ Perceptions of STEMPreneur for Supporting Computational Thinking in Science Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17977/um065.v7.i2.2027.8Keywords:
Computational thinking, Primary science education, STEM education, STEMPreneur, Teacher perceptionsAbstract
The increasing emphasis on computational thinking (CT) in primary education has encouraged the exploration of innovative pedagogical approaches that integrate scientific inquiry with authentic problem solving. One emerging approach is STEMPreneur, which combines STEM education with entrepreneurial thinking to foster innovation and value creation. This study explored Indonesian primary school teachers' perceptions of STEMPreneur for promoting computational thinking in Primary Science (IPAS) learning. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed involving 50 primary school teachers from Jakarta and Bekasi, followed by semi-structured interviews with five purposively selected participants. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were examined through thematic analysis. The findings revealed that teachers perceived STEMPreneur as a relevant and pedagogically valuable approach that supports the development of decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, algorithmic thinking, and evaluation. However, teachers also identified challenges related to pedagogical knowledge, instructional resources, computational thinking assessment, and curriculum time. To address these challenges, participants recommended continuous professional development, practical instructional resources, explicit computational thinking assessment, and authentic project-based learning. The study proposes a pedagogical ecosystem for STEMPreneur implementation that provides a conceptual framework for integrating computational thinking into primary science education.
References
Abanoz, T., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2025). Unleashing the potential: Illuminating pedagogical strategies employed by early childhood educators in STEM education for cultivating algorithmic thinking skills in young learners. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 33(1), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2024.2339274
Abu Khurma, O., Al Darayseh, A., & Alramamneh, Y. (2023). A framework for incorporating the “learning how to learn” approach in teaching STEM education. Education Sciences, 13(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010001
Almazroui, K. M. (2023). Project-based learning for 21st-century skills: An overview and case study of moral education in the UAE. The Social Studies, 114(3), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2022.2134281
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2004). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academies Press. https://www.csun.edu/~sb4310/How%20People%20Learn.pdf
Bronfenbrenner, U. (2009). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=8cf0FYm0jW0C
Cian, H., & Brasili, A. (2025). Rural elementary teachers’ computational thinking self-efficacy through community-based citizen science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 36(1), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2024.2375843
Cirkony, C., Rickinson, M., Walsh, L., Gleeson, J., Salisbury, M., Cutler, B., Berry, M., & Smith, K. (2024). Beyond effective approaches: A rapid review response to designing professional learning. Professional Development in Education, 50(1), 24–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1973075
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2020). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/asi/research-design/book270550
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311
Fawaida, U., Budhi, H. S., & Raida, S. A. (2023). Integration of science entrepreneurship through STEM to grow teacher preneur spirits in natural science students. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2595(1), 040022. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0124428
Feng, S., & Yang, D. (2022). Teachers’ perceived value, challenges, and advice for implementing computational thinking in elementary classrooms. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 30(3), 293–320. https://doi.org/10.70725/048319epkkuu
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & McEachen, J. (2017). Deep learning: Engage the world change the world. Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506368603
Hynes, B., Costin, Y., & Richardson, I. (2023). Educating for STEM: Developing entrepreneurial thinking in STEM (Entre-STEM). In Enhancing entrepreneurial mindsets through STEM education (pp. 165–194). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17816-0_8
Israel, M., Liu, R., Yan, W., Sherwood, H., Martin, W., Fancsali, C., Rivera-Cash, E., & Adair, A. (2022). Understanding barriers to school-wide computational thinking integration at the elementary grades: Lessons from three schools. In Computational thinking in PreK-5: Empirical evidence for integration and future directions (pp. 64–71). https://doi.org/10.1145/3507951.3519289
Iwata, M., Pitkänen, K., Laru, J., & Mäkitalo, K. (2020). Exploring potentials and challenges to develop twenty-first century skills and computational thinking in K–12 maker education. Frontiers in Education, 5, 87. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00087
Jeltova, I., Birney, D., Fredine, N., Jarvin, L., Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2007). Dynamic assessment as a process-oriented assessment in educational settings. Advances in Speech Language Pathology, 9(4), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/14417040701460390
Kafai, Y. B., & Proctor, C. (2022). A revaluation of computational thinking in K–12 education: Moving toward computational literacies. Educational Researcher, 51(2), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211057904
Kakavas, P., & Ugolini, F. C. (2019). Computational thinking in primary education: A systematic literature review. Research on Education and Media, 11(2), 64–94. https://doi.org/10.2478/rem-2019-0023
Kaya-Capocci, S., Pabuccu-Akis, A., & Orhan-Ozteber, N. (2025). Entrepreneurial STEM education: Enhancing students’ resourcefulness and problem-solving skills. Research in Science Education, 55(1), 103–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10189-y
Kerimbayev, N., Nurym, N., Akramova, A., & Abdykarimova, S. (2023). Educational robotics: Development of computational thinking in collaborative online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 14987–15009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11806-5
Kite, V., & Park, S. (2023). What’s computational thinking?: Secondary science teachers’ conceptualizations of computational thinking (CT) and perceived barriers to CT integration. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(4), 391–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2110068
Kong, S.-C. (2016). A framework of curriculum design for computational thinking development in K–12 education. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(4), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0076-z
Li, S., Liu, Y., & Su, Y.-S. (2022). Differential analysis of teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) abilities according to teaching stages and educational levels. Sustainability, 14(12), 7176. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127176
Mapanga, A., & Faleni, N. (2025). Integrating entrepreneurship education into STEM curricula in Global South higher education institutions. Discover Education, 4(1), 335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00798-8
Mills, K. A., Cope, J., Scholes, L., & Rowe, L. (2025). Coding and computational thinking across the curriculum: A review of educational outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 95(3), 581–618. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241241327
Ng, P. H., Chen, P. Q., Wu, A. C., Tai, K. S., & Li, C. (2024). Reimagining STEM learning: A comparative analysis of traditional and service learning approaches for social entrepreneurship. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 2212–2226. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3492352
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Oved, O., & Alt, D. (2025). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) as a precursor to their perceived adopting of educational AI tools for teaching purposes. Education and Information Technologies, 30(10), 14095–14121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13371-5
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.
Ramadhani, S. (2023). Implementation curriculum Merdeka Belajar learn science and social (IPAS) learning in elementary school: Perspective teacher. Edukasi Islami: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 12(001). https://doi.org/10.30868/ei.v12i001.5488
Setiawan, B., Ardianto, D., & Windiyani, T. (2025). Integrative trends in future-ready education: STEM, ESD, and artificial intelligence in Jakarta’s primary schools. International Journal of Education and Learning Studies, 1(2), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.64421/ijels.v1i2.6
Soomro, B. A., & Shah, N. (2022). Entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, need for achievement and entrepreneurial intention among commerce students in Pakistan. Education + Training, 64(1), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2021-0023
Surul, R., & Septiliana, L. (2023). Analysis of the implementation of IPAS (natural and social sciences) learning in the Merdeka curriculum. Educatio: Journal of Education, 8(2), 320–328. https://doi.org/10.29138/educatio.v8i3.1301
UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.54675/YFRE1448
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2022). Integrating computational thinking in STEM education: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(8), 1949–1972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10227-5
Weng, X., Ye, H., Dai, Y., & Ng, O. (2024). Integrating artificial intelligence and computational thinking in educational contexts: A systematic review of instructional design and student learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(6), 1420–1450. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241248686
World Economic Forum. (2023). The future of jobs report 2023. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/
Xu, X., Shen, W., Islam, A., & Zhou, Y. (2023). A whole learning process-oriented formative assessment framework to cultivate complex skills. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02200-0
Yeni, S., Grgurina, N., Saeli, M., Hermans, F., Tolboom, J., & Barendsen, E. (2024). Interdisciplinary integration of computational thinking in K–12 education: A systematic review. Informatics in Education, 23(1), 223–278. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2024.08
Yu, W., Zheng, Z., & He, J. (2025). Integrating entrepreneurial education into STEM education: A systematic review. Research in Science Education, 55(1), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10193-2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bramianto Setiawan, Septian Mukhlis, Ahmad Fauzi, Zulela, Muhammad Faiz Rayyan, Vina Iasha, Prima Trisna Aji
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
