Open Access


Research Article

Main Article Content

Cecilia Kikilia Tsoukalacorresponding author


The present article aims to underline the role of multimodal educational material in STEM Integrated early childhood education. Through social semiotics assumption that meaning arises in action and interaction, we argue that robotics, digital media, haptic materials, toys, books, tablets, actions, and artifacts have an active and dynamic role in multimodal learning and construct meaning in young children's STEM educational process. The literature review has revealed a research gap concerning combined multimodal aspects in STEM concepts for young children. We adopted a mixed-method collective case study design based on four case studies in which children interact with multimodal STEM educational material. Due to the principles for effective STEM teaching and the perspectives of integrated STEM education, our findings illustrate that MmEM in STEM concepts, through play-based, model-based, inquiry-based teaching practices (among other open-ended), may provide to children multimodal learning environments, engage them in authentic and meaningful learning, promote teamwork, communication and social skills, challenge and motivate them to make meaning of their learning.

integrated STEM education, early childhood, educational material, multimodality

Article Details

How to Cite
Tsoukala, C. (2021). STEM integrated education and multimodal educational material. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 96-113.


  1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2), 131-152.
  2. Alade, F., Lauricella, A.R., Beaudoin-Ryan, L. and Wartella, E. (2016) Measuring with Murray: touchscreen technology and preschoolers’ STEM learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 433- 441.
  3. Ampartzaki, M., Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2021). Deepening Our Knowledge about Sustainability Education in the Early Years: Lessons from a Water Project. Education Sciences, 11(6), 251.
  4. Anagnostopoulou, K., Hatzinikita, V. & Christidou, V. (2012). PISA and biology school textbooks: The role of visual material. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1839-1845.
  5. Atmatzidou, S., Markelis, I., & Demetriadis, S. (2008). The use of LEGO Mindstorms in elementary and secondary education: game as a way of triggering learning. Work-shop Proceedings of International Conference on Simulation, Modeling, and Programming for Autonomous Robots (SIMPAR), 22-30.
  6. Bers, M. U. (2017) Coding as a Playground: Programming and Computational Thinking in the Early Childhood Classroom, Routledge, London. Bers, M.U. (2018) ’Coding, playgrounds and literacy in early childhood education: the development of KIBO robotics and ScratchJr’, Proceedings of the Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), IEEE, pp. 2094-2102.
  7. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11.
  8. Brenneman, K. (2011). Assessment for preschool science learning and learning environments. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(1), 1-9.
  9. Brooks, M. (2009). Drawing, visualisation and young children’s exploration of “big ideas”. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 319-341.
  10. Campbell, C., Speldewinde, C., Howitt, C., & MacDonald, A. (2018). STEM practice in the early years. Creative Education, 9(01), 11.
  11. Chatzopoulos, A., Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., Papoutsidakis, M., Elza, D., & Psycharis, S. (2021). DuBot: An Open-Source, Low-Cost Robot for STEM and Educational Robotics. In Handbook of Research on Using Educational Robotics to Facilitate Student Learning (pp. 441-465). IGI Global.
  12. Chaudron, S., Gioia, R. S., & Gemo, M. (2018) Young Children (0-8) and digital technology: a qualitative study across Europe, Technical Report, Publications Office of the European Union.
  13. Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers and Education, 109, 162-175.
  14. Christidou, V. (2008). Introduction. In V., Christidou (Ed.), Teaching children in Science Education, (pp.9-52), Thessaloniki: Kyriakidi Bros [in Greek].
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  16. De Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2008). Model-Facilitated Learning. Eto J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merri¨enboer, & M. P. Driscoll, (eds.) Handbook of re-search on educational communications and technology (3rd edition).(pp. 457-468). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  17. Dimitracopoulou, A. (2018). Trends and Dimensions of “Educational Material’ Environment” in Technology Enhanced Learning Activities: Definitions and Specifications. In C. Skoumpourdi, M. Skoumios (Eds) 3rd Conf on Educational Material of Mathematics and Sciences, 9-11 Nov 2018, Univ of the Aegean, pp.117-145, ISBN: 978-960-86791-9-1.
  18. Dorouka, P., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Nanotechnology and mobile learning: perspectives and opportunities in young children’s education. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 13(3), 237-252.
  19. English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 1-8.
  20. Fleer, M., Edwards, S. E., Hammer, M. D., Kennedy, A. M., Ridgeway, A., Robbins, J. R., & Surman, L. W. (2006). Early childhood learning communities. Sociocultural research in practice. (1 ed.) Pearson.
  21. Glancy, A. W., & Moore, T. J. (2013). “Theoretical Foundations for Effective STEM Learning Environments”. School of Engineering Education Working Papers.
  22. Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): A Primer. Congressional Research Service, 1-15.
  23. Ham, O.K., Sung, K.M., & Kim, H.K. (2013). Factors associated with screen time among schoolage children in Korea. The Journal of School Nursing, 29(6), 425-434.
  24. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1997). Qualitative changes in intuitive biology. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12(2), 111-130.
  25. Hatisaru, V., Beswick, K., & Fraser, S. (2019). STEM Learning Environments: Perceptions of STEM Education Researchers. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. In G. Hine, S. Blackley, & A. Cooke (Eds.). Mathematics Education Re-search: Impacting Practice (Proceedings of the 42nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia) pp. 340-347. Perth: MERGA.
  26. Helm, J. H. & Katz, L. (2016). Young Investigators. The Project approach in the early years (3rd edition) New York : Washington, D.C.: Teachers College Press.
  27. Hoachlander, G. (2014/2015). Integrating SETM. Educational Leadership, (December 2014/January 2015), 74-78.
  28. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, A. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington: National Academies Press.
  29. Hwang, J., & Taylor, Jonte, C. (2016). Stemming on STEM: A STEM Education Framework for Students with Disabilities. Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities, 19(1), 4.
  30. Huber, B., Tarasuik, J., Antoniou, M.N., Garrett, C., Bowe, S.J., Kaufman, J., & Team, S.B. (2016). Young children’s transfer of learning from a touchscreen device. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 56-64.
  31. Karakose, T., Yirci, R., & Papadakis, S. (2021). Exploring the Interrelationship between COVID-19 Phobia, Work-Family Conflict, Family Work Conflict, and Life Satisfaction among School Administrators for Advancing Sustainable Management. Sustainability, 13(15), 8654.
  32. Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2013). The effect of a classroom-based intensive robotics and programming workshop on sequencing ability in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), 245-255.
  33. Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 1-11..
  34. Kress, G., & Bezemer, J. (2008). Writing in multimodal texts: A social semiotic account of designs for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166-195.
  35. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2d ed.). London: Routledge.
  36. Leonard, J., Buss, A., Gamboa, R., Mitchell, M., Fashola, O.S., Hubert, T., & Almughyirah, S. (2016). Using robotics and game design to enhance children’s self-efficacy, STEM attitudes, and computational thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 860-876.
  37. Lin, H. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Research trends of flipped classroom studies for medical courses: a review of journal publications from 2008 to 2017 based on the technology enhanced learning model. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1011-1027.
  38. Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons: International comparisons of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Melbourne: Australian Council of Learned Academies.
  39. Marsh, J., Kontovourki, S., Tafa, E., & Salomaa, S. (2017). Developing Digital Literacy in Early Years Settings: Professional Development Needs for Practitioners, A White Paper for COST Action IS1410.
  40. Mills, K. A. (2016). Literacy theories for the digital age: Social, critical, multimodal, spatial, material and sensory lenses. Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual Matters
  41. Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative robotic instruction: a graph teaching experience. Computers and Education, 53(2), 330-342.
  42. Moore, T. J., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Advancing the state of the art of STEM integration. Journal of STEM Education, 15(1), 5-10.
  43. Morrison, J. (2006). STEM education monograph series: Attributes of STEM education. Teaching Institute for Essential Science, Baltimore, MD.
  44. Oakley, G., Wildy, H., & Berman, Y. E. (2018). Multimodal digital text creation using tablets and open-ended creative apps to improve the literacy learning of children in early childhood classrooms. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 2018, 1-25.
  45. Óskarsdóttir, G. (2008). The influence of the teaching material used in class on children’s ideas about the human body. Planning science instruction: From insight to learning to pedagogical practices. Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Research Symposium on Science Education 11th-15th June. NFSUN, Reykjavik: Science Education Research Group, University of Iceland.
  46. Pantidos, P. (2019). Introduction. In P., Pantidos (Ed.) The role of Sciences in preschool education (pp 1-15). Athens: NewTech Pub.
  47. Papadakis, S. (2020). Evaluating a Teaching Intervention for Teaching STEM and Programming Concepts Through the Creation of aWeather-Forecast App for Smart Mobile Devices. In Handbook of Research on Tools for Teaching Computational Thinking in P-12 Education (pp. 31-53). IGI Global.
  48. Papadakis, S. (2021). Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research (AMLER): Mobile learning as an educational reform. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(1), 1-4.
  49. Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (Eds.). (2019). Mobile learning applications in early childhood education. IGI Global.
  50. Papadakis, S., Vaiopoulou, J., Sifaki, E., Stamovlasis, D., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Attitudes towards the Use of Educational Robotics: Exploring Pre-Service and In-Service Early Childhood Teacher Profiles. Education Sciences, 11(5), 204.
  51. Papandreou, M., & Terzi, M. (2011). Exploring children’s ideas about natural phenomena in kindergarten classes: designing and evaluating eliciting activities. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 5(2), 27-47.
  52. Petousi, V., & Sifaki, E. (2020). Contextualizing harm in the framework of research misconduct. Findings from discourse analysis of scientific publications. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 23(3/4), 149-174.
  53. Poultsakis, S., Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Psycharis, S. (2021). The man-agement of Digital Learning Objects of Natural Sciences and Digital Experiment Simulation Tools by teachers. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 58-71.
  54. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science education, 66(2), 211-227.
  55. Psycharis, S. (2018). STEAM in educations: A literature review on the role of Computational Thinking, Engineering Epistemology and Computational Science. Computational STEAM Pedagogy, 4(2), 51-72.
  56. Resnick, M. (2007). All I really need to know (about creative thinking) I learned (by studying how children learn) in kindergarten. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI conference on Creativity & cognition (pp. 1-6). ACM.
  57. Rogowsky, B. A., Terwilliger, C. C., Young, C. A., & Kribbs, E. E. (2018). Playful learning with technology: the effect of computer-assisted instruction on literacy and numeracy skills of preschoolers. International Journal of Play, 7(1), 60-80.
  58. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, December/January, 20-26.
  59. Smyrnaioy, Z., & Weil-Barais, A. (2004). Cognitive evaluation of a technology based learning environment for scientific education. In Computer Based Learning in Sciences, Proceedings of Sixth International Conference, CBLIS (pp. 5-10).
  60. Solomon, T. L., Vasilyeva, M., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. C. (2015). Minding the gap: Children’s difficulty conceptualizing spatial intervals as linear measurement units. Developmental Psychology, 51(11), 1564-1573.
  61. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.435-453). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  62. Takeuchi, M. A., Sengupta, P., Shanahan, M. C., Adams, J.D., & Hachem, M. (in press). Transdisciplinarity in STEM education: A critical review. Studies in Science Education, 56(2), 213-253.
  63. Texley, J., & Ruud, R. M. (2018). Teaching STEM Literacy A Constructivist Approach for Ages 3 to 8. Redleaf Press.
  64. Tsoukala, K. (2014). Investigating the understanding of Biology concepts by preschool children: The contribution of haptic modeling and digital teaching material. Unpublished Master thesis. Volos: University of Thessaly [in Greek].
  65. Tsoukala, K., & Christidou, V. (2016). Developing understanding of biology concepts by preschoolers while engaging with hands-on and digital pedagogical material. In B., Tselfes, (ed.) Preschool age: the natural sciences in education relationship between children and teachers. Department of Education and Training in Preschool age. Na-tional and Kapodistrian University of Athens, (pp 179-195), Athens: Artemis Petropoulou Publications [in Greek].
  66. Tsoukala, K., & Christidou, V. (2016). Sciences and educational material: teaching biological concepts in kindergarten. In M., Kalogiannakis (ed.) Teaching natural sciences in preschool education. Challenges and prospects (pp 96-116), Athens: Gutenberg [in Greek].
  67. Tsoukala, K., & Halkiadaki, Z. (2015). Educational Robotics in Pre-School and Primary Education. PRIME, 8(2), 118-131.
  68. Tsoukala, K., & Stylianidou, F. (2018). Familiarizing Preschoolers with Nature of Science. In O.E., Finlayson, E., McLoughlin, S., Erduran, & P., Childs (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2017 Conference. Research, Practice and Collaboration in Science Education, Part 15/15, (co-ed. Bodil Sundberg & Maria Kallery), (pp. 2045-2052). Dublin, Ireland: Dublin City University.
  69. Tsoukala, K., & Stylianidou, F. (2019). Familiarizing preschoolers with the nature of science - European project “Creativity in Early Years Science Education”. In P., Pantidos (Ed.) (pp55-83), Athens: NewTech Pub [in Greek].
  70. Tsupros, N., Kohler, R., & Hallinen, J. (2009). STEM Education in Southwestern Pennsylvania the missing components.
  71. Tzagkaraki, E., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Exploring the Use of Educational Robotics in primary school and its possible place in the curricula. In Educational Robotics International Conference (pp. 216-229). Springer, Cham.
  72. Vaiopoulou, J., Papadakis, S., Sifaki, E., Stamovlasis, D., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Parents’ Perceptions of Educational Apps Use for Kindergarten Children: Development and Validation of a New Instrument (PEAU-p) and Exploration of Parents’ Profiles. Behavioral Sciences, 11(6), 82.
  73. Vidakis, N., Barianos, A. K., Trampas, A. M., Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Vassilakis, K. (2019). in-Game Raw Data Collection and Visualization in the Context of the “ThimelEdu” Educational Game. In International Conference on Computer Supported Education (pp. 629-646). Springer, Cham.
  74. Wood, E., Petkovski, M., De Pasquale, D., Gottardo, A., Evans, M. A., & Savage, R. S. (2016). Parent scaffolding of young children when engaged with mobile technology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 690
  75. Yin, R. K. Case study research: design and methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 2009.
  76. Yore, L. D., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy-empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 291-314
  77. Zygouris, N. C., Striftou, A., Dadaliaris, A. N., Stamoulis, G. I., Xenakis, A. C., & Vavougios, D. (2017). The use of LEGO mindstorms in elementary schools. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, 514-516.