Integrating science and mathematics at secondary school level: Key elements of practice

Kevin Manunure; Nicholas Zezekwa; Gladys Sunzuma; Christopher Mutseekwa; Kevin Manunure; Nicholas Zezekwa; Gladys Sunzuma; Christopher Mutseekwa

doi:10.3934/steme.2026003

STEM Education

2026, Volume 6, Issue 1: 35-55. doi: 10.3934/steme.2026003

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Integrating science and mathematics at secondary school level: Key elements of practice

1.
Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong
2.
Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Bindura University of Science Education, Bindura, Zimbabwe
3.
Department of Education, Rwanda Basic Education Board, Kigali, Rwanda

Academic Editor: Kwesi Yaro

Received: 21 August 2025 Revised: 23 December 2025 Accepted: 09 January 2026 Published: 19 January 2026

Integrated STEM education is critical for developing 21st-century skills, interest, engagement, and outcomes. However, in-service teachers often struggle with implementation due to inadequate training and a lack of clear, practical models for blending the disciplines. In this study, we investigated the key factors that can enhance the effective integration of mathematics and science in a real secondary classroom setting, employing a qualitative case study approach that drew on data from classroom observations, student and teacher interviews, student artifacts, and teacher reflections. A science and mathematics teacher collaborated to teach the concept of density in two lesson study cycles, integrating mathematical modeling and science inquiry learning approaches. Our findings revealed four dynamically interdependent factors critical to successful integration: Teacher knowledge, such as Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), integration strategies, and confidence; student autonomy; time allocation; and contingency management. For instance, fostering student autonomy during lessons often requires significant time allocation to accomplish the set objectives and it pauses challenging contingency strategies. How these factors interact and influence the nature of science and mathematics integration was represented in the proposed Dynamic Interdependence Framework (DIF). The framework positioned the teacher as the central agent whose negotiation of this web determines the nature of the integrated lesson, which in turn reinforces their knowledge through a feedback loop of reflective practice. We conclude the study with implications for research, teacher training, and classroom practice in diverse educational contexts, highlighting the need for professional development focused on collaborative planning.
- integrated STEM,
- science and mathematics integration,
- lesson study,
- teacher knowledge,
- student autonomy,
- time allocation,
- contingency management
Citation: Kevin Manunure, Nicholas Zezekwa, Gladys Sunzuma, Christopher Mutseekwa. Integrating science and mathematics at secondary school level: Key elements of practice[J]. STEM Education, 2026, 6(1): 35-55. doi: 10.3934/steme.2026003

Related Papers:

Abstract

Integrated STEM education is critical for developing 21st-century skills, interest, engagement, and outcomes. However, in-service teachers often struggle with implementation due to inadequate training and a lack of clear, practical models for blending the disciplines. In this study, we investigated the key factors that can enhance the effective integration of mathematics and science in a real secondary classroom setting, employing a qualitative case study approach that drew on data from classroom observations, student and teacher interviews, student artifacts, and teacher reflections. A science and mathematics teacher collaborated to teach the concept of density in two lesson study cycles, integrating mathematical modeling and science inquiry learning approaches. Our findings revealed four dynamically interdependent factors critical to successful integration: Teacher knowledge, such as Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), integration strategies, and confidence; student autonomy; time allocation; and contingency management. For instance, fostering student autonomy during lessons often requires significant time allocation to accomplish the set objectives and it pauses challenging contingency strategies. How these factors interact and influence the nature of science and mathematics integration was represented in the proposed Dynamic Interdependence Framework (DIF). The framework positioned the teacher as the central agent whose negotiation of this web determines the nature of the integrated lesson, which in turn reinforces their knowledge through a feedback loop of reflective practice. We conclude the study with implications for research, teacher training, and classroom practice in diverse educational contexts, highlighting the need for professional development focused on collaborative planning.

References

[1]	Kelley, T.R. and Knowles, J.G., A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM education, 2016, 3(1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
[2]	Stohlmann, M., Moore, T.J., Roehrig, G.H., Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. J-PEER, 2012, 2(1): 28–34. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653 doi: 10.5703/1288284314653
[3]	Berlin, D.F. and White, A.L., A longitudinal look at attitudes and perceptions related to the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education. School science and mathematics, 2012,112(1): 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00111.x doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00111.x
[4]	Roehrig, G.H., Dare, E.A., Ring-Whalen, E. and Wieselmann, J.R., Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 2021, 8(1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8 doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8
[5]	Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W. and Depaepe, F., The influence of teachers' attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2018, 71: 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014 doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014
[6]	Deming, D.J. and Noray, K.L., STEM careers and technological change, Vol. 24, Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, MA; 2018.
[7]	Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., et al., Integrated STEM Education: A Systematic Review of Instructional Practices in Secondary Education. European Journal of STEM Education, 2018, 3(1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/85525 doi: 10.20897/ejsteme/85525
[8]	Galadima, U., Ismail, Z. and Ismail, N., A need analysis for developing integrated stem course training module for pre-service mathematics teachers. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 2019, 8(5): 47–52. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.E1006.0585C19 doi: 10.35940/ijeat.E1006.0585C19
[9]	Ríordáin, M.N., Johnston, J. and Walshe, G., Making mathematics and science integration happen: key aspects of practice. International journal of mathematical education in science and technology, 2016, 47(2): 233–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1078001 doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2015.1078001
[10]	Srikoom, W., Faikhamta, C. and Hanuscin, D.L., Dimensions of Effective STEM Integrated Teaching Practice. K-12 STEM Education. The Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology (IPST), 2018, 4(2): 313–30.
[11]	Treacy, P., A conceptual framework for integrating mathematics and science in the secondary classroom. SN Social Sciences, 2021, 1(6): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00166-x doi: 10.1007/s43545-021-00166-x
[12]	Lewis, C.C., Perry, R.R. and Hurd, J., Improving mathematics instruction through lesson study: A theoretical model and North American case. Journal of mathematics teacher education, 2009, 12: 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9102-7 doi: 10.1007/s10857-009-9102-7
[13]	Takahashi, A. and McDougal, T., Collaborative lesson research: maximizing the impact of lesson study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 2016, 48(4): 513–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0752-x doi: 10.1007/s11858-015-0752-x
[14]	Bybee, R.W., Taylor, J.A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J.C., Westbrook, A., et al., The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins and Effectiveness, Colorado Springs: Office of Science Education National Institutes of Health; 2006.
[15]	So, W., CONNECTING MATHEMATICS IN PRIMARY SCIENCE INQUIRY PROJECTS. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2013, 11: 385–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9342-3 doi: 10.1007/s10763-012-9342-3
[16]	Farida, E., Syaharuddin, S., Mandailina, V. and Abdillah, A., Comparison of the Effectiveness of Realistic Mathematics Approach and Inquiry Approach in Improving Creative Thinking Ability and Problem-Solving Skills. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 2025, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v15i1.27388 doi: 10.30998/formatif.v15i1.27388
[17]	Leung, A., Polya's problem solving cycle as a boundary object for the STEM disciplines' inquiry processes. In Post-Conference Proceedings of the Integrated Education for the Real World 5th International STEM in Education Conference, 2018,205–12.
[18]	Artigue, M. and Blomhøj, M., Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics. ZDM Mathematics Education, 2013, 45(6): 797–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6 doi: 10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6
[19]	Sala Sebastià, G., Barquero, B. and Font, V., Inquiry and Modeling for Teaching Mathematics in Interdisciplinary Contexts: How Are They Interrelated? Mathematics, 2021, 9(15): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9151714 doi: 10.3390/math9151714
[20]	Leung, A., Exploring STEM Pedagogy in the Mathematics Classroom: a Tool-Based Experiment Lesson on Estimation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2018, 17: 1339–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9924-9 doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9924-9
[21]	Manunure, K., Integrating Science Inquiry and Mathematical Modeling when Teaching a Common Topic in Zimbabwe: an iSTEM Approach to Teacher Change, Hong Kong Baptist University, Doctoral Thesis, 2025. Available from: https://scholars.hkbu.edu.hk/ws/portalfiles/portal/129441958/G25THFL-066716T.pdf
[22]	Borromeo Ferri, R., Mandatory mathematical modelling in school: What do we want the teachers to know? In: Mathematical modelling education in east and west, 2021,103–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66996-6_9
[23]	National Research Council, National science education standards, National Academies Press, 1996.
[24]	Zhang, D., Orrill, C. and Campbell, T., Using the mixture Rasch model to explore knowledge resources students invoke in mathematic and science assessments. School Science and Mathematics, 2015,115(7): 356–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12135 doi: 10.1111/ssm.12135
[25]	McBride, J.W. and Silverman, F.L., Integrating Elementary/Middle School Science and Mathematics. School science and mathematics, 1991, 91(7): 285–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1991.tb12102.x doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1991.tb12102.x
[26]	Jerrim, J. and Shure, N., Achievement of 15-Year- Olds in Wales: PISA 2015 National Report, 2016.
[27]	Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J., Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers college record, 2006,108(6): 1017‒54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
[28]	Shulman, L.S., Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational researcher, 1986, 15(2): 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004 doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
[29]	Chien, Y.H. and Chang, F.Y., An importance-performance analysis of teachers' perception of STEM engineering design education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 2023, 10(1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01653-7 doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-01653-7
[30]	Niess, M.L., Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and teacher education, 2005, 21(5): 509–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.03.006
[31]	Song, M., Teaching integrated STEM in Korea: Structure of teacher competence. International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 2017, 2(4): 61–72.
[32]	Bryan, L.A., Moore, T.J., Johnson, C.C. and Roehrig, G.H., Integrated STEM education. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton and T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM road map: A framework for integrated STEM education, 2015, 23–38. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315753157-3
[33]	Thuy, N.T.T., Bien, N.V., Quy, D.X., Fostering Teachers' Competence of the Integrated STEM Education. J Penelit Pembelajaran IPA, 2020, 6(2): 166. https://doi.org/10.30870/jppi.v6i2.6441 doi: 10.30870/jppi.v6i2.6441
[34]	Beswick, K. and Fraser, S., Developing mathematics teachers' 21st century competence for teaching in STEM contexts. ZDM, 2019, 51(6): 955–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01084-2 doi: 10.1007/s11858-019-01084-2
[35]	Menon, D., Shorman, D., Cox, D. and Thomas, A., Preservice Elementary Teachers Conceptions and Self-Efficacy for Integrated STEM. Education Sciences, 2023, 13(5): 529. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050529 doi: 10.3390/educsci13050529
[36]	Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W. and Depaepe, F., Teachers' Attitudes Toward Teaching Integrated STEM: the Impact of Personal Background Characteristics and School Context. Int J of Sci and Math Educ, 2019, 17(5): 987–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9898-7 doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9898-7
[37]	Basu, D., Panorkou, N., Zhu, M., Lal, P. and Samanthula, B., Exploring the Mathematics of Gravity. Mathematics Teacher: Learning and Teaching PK–12, 2020,113: 39–46. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTLT.2019.0130 doi: 10.5951/MTLT.2019.0130
[38]	Engle, S. and Eggleton, P., Play-Doh Volumes: An Experience in Science/Math Lesson Integration. The Hoosier Science Teacher, 2024, 47(1): 31‒37. https://doi.org/10.14434/thst.v47i1.37379 doi: 10.14434/thst.v47i1.37379
[39]	Stake, R.E., The art of case study research, sage; 1995.
[40]	Yin, R.K., Case study research: Design and methods, Second Edition, Vol. 5, London: Sage publications, 2013.
[41]	Yin, R.K., Case study research and applications: Design and Methods, Vol. 6, CA: Sage Thousand Oaks, 2017.
[42]	Hays, P.A., Case study research. In: deMarrais K, Lapan SD, editors. Foundations for research, 2003,233–50.
[43]	Lewis, C., How does lesson study improve mathematics instruction? ZDM, 2016, 48: 571–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0792-x doi: 10.1007/s11858-016-0792-x
[44]	Manunure, K. and Leung, A., Integrating inquiry and mathematical modeling when teaching a common topic in lower secondary school: an iSTEM approach. Front Educ, 2024, 9: 1376951. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1376951 doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1376951
[45]	Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V. and Braun, V., Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2017, 2(17–37): 25. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2 doi: 10.4135/9781526405555.n2
[46]	Frykholm, J. and Glasson, G., Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and mathematics, 2005,105(3): 127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x
[47]	Tytler, R., Mulligan, J., White, P.J. and Kirk, M., Promoting effective interactions between mathematics and science: Challenges of learning through interdisciplinarity. In: Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Education in STEM: Changes and Innovations, 2024, 33–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52924-5_3
[48]	Zbiek, R.M., Peters, S.A., Galluzzo, B. and White, S.J., Secondary mathematics teachers learning to do and teach mathematical modeling: a trajectory. J Math Teacher Educ, 2024, 27(1): 55–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09550-7 doi: 10.1007/s10857-022-09550-7
[49]	Mok, I.A.C., Chen, M., Ho, C.P. and Lui, C.T., Teacher factors contributing to an innovative Hong Kong school-based experience of STEM curriculum design via teacher agency perspectives. In: Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Education in STEM: Changes and Innovations, 2024,295–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52924-5_14
[50]	Seeley, L., Etkina, E. and Vokos, S., The intertwined roles of teacher content knowledge and knowledge of scientific practices in support of a science learning community. Pedagogical Content Knowledge in STEM: Research to Practice, 2018, 17–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_2 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_2
[51]	Artigue, M., Bosch, M., Doorman, M., Juhász, P., Kvasz, L. and Maass, K., Inquiry based mathematics education and the development of learning trajectories. Teaching Mathematics and Computer Science, 2020, 18(3): 63–89. https://doi.org/10.5485/TMCS.2020.0505 doi: 10.5485/TMCS.2020.0505
[52]	De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J. and Van Petegem, P., Integrated STEM Education: The Effects of a Long-Term Intervention on Students' Cognitive Performance. European Journal of STEM Education, 2022, 7(1): 13. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/12738 doi: 10.20897/ejsteme/12738
[53]	Dorier, J.L. and Maass, K., Inquiry-based mathematics education. Encyclopedia of mathematics education, 2020,384–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_176 doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_176
[54]	Creemers, B.P. and Reezigt, G.J., School level conditions affecting the effectiveness of instruction. School effectiveness and school Improvement, 1996, 7(3): 197–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345960070301 doi: 10.1080/0924345960070301
[55]	Van de Grift, W., Quality of teaching in four European countries: A review of the literature and application of an assessment instrument. Educational research, 2007, 49(2): 127–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880701369651 doi: 10.1080/00131880701369651
[56]	van de Pol, J., Volman, M. and Beishuizen, J., Promoting teacher scaffolding in small-group work: A contingency perspective. Teaching and teacher education, 2012, 28(2): 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.09.009 doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2011.09.009

Author's biography Dr. Kevin Manunure is a Science and Mathematics educator. His research interest is in Science education, STEM integration, and Teacher Professional Development; Dr. Nicholas Zezekwa is a senior lecturer and researcher in science education at Bindura University of Science Education (BUSE) in Zimbabwe. His expertise is in researching on and teaching general science and physics education, with significant experience across junior secondary, 'O' Level, 'A' Level, undergraduate, and postgraduate levels; Dr. Gladys Sunzuma is an academic researcher from Bindura University of Science Education. Her research interest is in Ethnomathematics & Medicine and Science education; Dr. Christopher Mutseekwa is a senior lecturer and researcher in the Department of Education, Rwanda Basic Education Board, Kigali, Rwanda. He is a researcher with a focus on Robotics in Education and STEM education

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2026 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)