Abstract: Scientific literacy is a fundamental aspect of modern education, which allows a person to understand, analyze and apply scientific knowledge in real-world situations. In the context of modern global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss and technological progress, the development of scientific literacy is becoming increasingly necessary.
This article focuses on the results of a pedagogical experiment based on a constructivist approach, interactive methods and STEM activities aimed at changing the concepts relevant to the scientific literacy of students. The results show that the experimental methodology creates a favorable and stimulating learning environment that supports active learning, leads to the successful change of conceptual misconceptions with scientifically sound concepts and an increase in the level of scientific literacy of students.
The analysis of the results of a survey is presented, which shows the positive assessment of students towards the applied experimental methodology.
Keywords: scientific literacy, conceptual misconceptions, constructivist approach, STEM approach, interactive methods
ЛИТЕРАТУРА
Ангелова, С. (2022). За предизвикателството „Формиране на ключови компетентности“ чрез природонаучно образование в началното училище. Педагогически алманах, 2, 201–209.
Епитропова, А. (2004). Активни стратегии в обучението за природата и човека в I–IV клас. Пловдив: Макрос.
Епитропова, А., & Ангелова, Б. (2011). Изучаване на човека и природата в началните класове. Пловдив: Хермес.
Илиева, Й. (2025). Педагогът и STEAM обучението в детската градина. В Предучилищното образование в България: Национални приоритети и международно сътрудничество в подкрепа на щастливо детство. Юбилеен сборник (с. 421–426). София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“.
Кожухарова, Д. (2020). STEAM технологиите за активно и интегративно учене. Science & Technologies, 10(6), 72–76.
Костова, З. (1998). Как да учим успешно? Иновации в обучението. София: Педагог 6.
Мирчева, И. (2004). Проблеми на дидактиката на родинознанието и природознанието. София: Веда Словена – ЖГ.
Мирчева, И., & Джамбазова, Е. (2006). Докосване до природата. София: Веда Словена – ЖГ.
Нейкова, Д. (2017). Нагласите на преподавателите към прилагането на интерактивни методи в обучението по български език (5.–7. клас). В Образование за живота, професионалната реализация и благополучието. Сборник от ХІІ Международен образователен и научен конгрес (с. 300–313). Стара Загора: Тракийски университет.
Петрова, В. (2003). Работата по проект при запознаване с природната и обществената среда в I–IV клас. Стара Загора: Тракийски университет, Педагогически факултет.
Петрова, В. (2005). Детските концепти за природата. Стара Загора: КОТА.
Петрова, В. (2009). 12 интерактивни метода. Стара Загора: КОТА.
Райкова, Ж., & Витларов, К. (2016). Връзка между научната грамотност и държавния образователен стандарт за учебно съдържание на учебния предмет „Човекът и природата“. Годишно научно-методическо списание, 7, 156–159.
Тафрова-Григорова, А. (2013). Съвременни тенденции в природонаучното образование на учениците. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 7(1), 121–200.
Тафрова-Григорова, А. (2016). Исторически корени на конструктивизма. Природните науки в образованието, 25(1), 75–106.
Тенева, М. (2012). Овладяване на дидактическата проблематика от студенти (Част 1). Стара Загора: Тракийски университет.
Тодорова, С. (2023). Методи на обучение, използвани за изграждане на природонаучна грамотност. Годишник на Педагогически факултет. Тракийски университет, 20, 128–141. https://doi.org/10.15547/YbFE.2023.08.
Цанков, Н., & Левунлиева, М. (2010). Конструктивистката идея в метода на интелектуалните карти. В Личностно развитие на учениците в съвременното образование и общество (Т. 4). Благоевград: УИ „Неофит Рилски“.
Atkinson, R., Hugo, J., Lundgren, D., Shapiro, M., & Thomas, J. (2007). Addressing the STEM challenge by expanding specialty math and science high schools. NCSSSMST Journal, 12(2), 14–23.
Bybee, R. (2008). Scientific Literacy, Environmental Issues, and PISA 2006: The 2008 Paul F-Brandwein Lecture. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 566–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9124-4.
Chen, X. (2013). STEM Attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014-001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fosnot, C., & Perry, R. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gray, A. (1997). Constructivist Teaching and Learning. SSTA Research Centre Report, 97-07. Retrieved from https://saskschoolboards.ca/wp-content/uploads/97-07.htm.
Laugksch, R. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<71::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-C.
Luckay, M., & Laugksch, R. (2015). The development and validation of an instrument to monitor the implementation of social constructivist learning environments in grade 9 science classrooms in South Africa. Research in Science Education, 45(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9410-5.
Petrova, V., Siderova, D., Stefanova, R., & Nikolova, D. (2010). Differentiation of the literary images of plants and animals by the scientific description with children at pre-school and primary school age. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 8(3), 312–315.
Raykova, Zh. (2008). Development of Procedural Skills in Science Education – Constructivist Approach. Plovdiv.
Siderova, D. (2019). Communication by text in pedagogical interaction for teachers’ professional competence. CBU International Conference Proceedings, 7, 623–628. https://doi.org/10.12955/cbup.v7.1429.
Temnikova, M. (2022). Using a frame for teaching for robust understanding (TRU) in the STEM Education in mathematics for kindergarten. Knowledge – International Journal, 53(2), 317–323.
Todorova, S. (2022). Science literacy of Bulgarian students through teachers’ view. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 20(3), 203–206. https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2022.03.006.
REFERENCES
Angelova, S. (2022). Za predizvikatelstvoto „Formirane na klyuchovi kompetentnosti“ chrez prirodonauchno obrazovanie v nachalnoto uchilishte. Pedagogicheski almanah, (2), 201–209.
Atkinson, R., Hugo, J., Lundgren, D., Shapiro, M., & Thomas, J. (2007). Addressing the STEM challenge by expanding specialty math and science high schools. NCSSSMST Journal, 12(2), 14–23.
Bybee, R. (2008). Scientific Literacy, Environmental Issues, and PISA 2006: The 2008 Paul F-Brandwein Lecture. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 566–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9124-4.
Chen, X. (2013). STEM Attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014-001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Epitropova, A. (2004). Aktivni strategii v obuchenieto za prirodata i choveka v I–IV klas. Plovdiv: Makros.
Epitropova, A., & Angelova, B. (2011). Izuchavane na choveka i prirodata v nachalnite klasove. Plovdiv: Hermes.
Fosnot, C., & Perry, R. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gray, A. (1997). Constructivist Teaching and Learning. SSTA Research Centre Report, 97-07. Retrieved from https://saskschoolboards.ca/wp-content/uploads/97-07.htm.
Ilieva, Y. (2025). Pedagogat i STEAM obuchenieto v detskata gradina. V Preduchilishtnoto obrazovanie v Bulgaria: Natsionalni prioriteti i mezhdunarodno satrudnichestvo v podkrepa na shtastlivo detstvo. Yubileen sbornik (ss. 421–426). Sofia: Universitetsko izdatelstvo „Sv. Kliment Ohridski“.
Kostova, Z. (1998). Kak da uchim uspeshno? Innovatsii v obuchenieto. Sofia: Pedagog 6.
Kozhuharova, D. (2020). STEAM tehnologiite za aktivno i integrativno uchene. Science & Technologies, 10(6), 72–76.
Laugksch, R. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<71::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-C.
Luckay, M., & Laugksch, R. (2015). The development and validation of an instrument to monitor the implementation of social constructivist learning environments in grade 9 science classrooms in South Africa. Research in Science Education, 45(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9410-5.
Mircheva, I. (2004). Problemi na didaktikata na rodinoznanieto i prirodoznanieto. Sofia: Veda Slovena – ZhG.
Mircheva, I., & Dzhambazova, E. (2006). Dokosvane do prirodata. Sofia: Veda Slovena – ZhG.
Neykova, D. (2017). Naglasite na prepodavatelite kam prilaganeto na interaktivni metodi v obuchenieto po balgarski ezik (5.–7. klas). V Obrazovanie za zhivota, profesionalnata realizatsiya i blagopoluchieto. Sbornik ot XII Mezhdunaroden obrazovatelen i nauchen kongres (ss. 300–313). Stara Zagora: Trakiyski universitet.
Petrova, V. (2003). Rabotata po proekt pri zapoznavane s prirodnata i obshtestvenata sreda v I–IV klas. Stara Zagora: Trakiyski universitet, Pedagogicheski fakultet.
Petrova, V. (2005). Detskite kontsepti za prirodata. Stara Zagora: KOTA.
Petrova, V. (2009). 12 interaktivni metoda. Stara Zagora: KOTA.
Petrova, V., Siderova, D., Stefanova, R., & Nikolova, D. (2010). Differentiation of the literary images of plants and animals by the scientific description with children at pre-school and primary school age. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 8(3), 312–315.
Raykova, Zh. (2008). Development of Procedural Skills in Science Education – Constructivist Approach. Plovdiv.
Raykova, Zh., & Vitlarov, K. (2016). Vrazka mezhdu nauchnata gramotnost i darzhavniya obrazovatelen standart za uchebno sadarzhanie na uchebniya predmet „Chovekat i prirodata“. Godishno nauchno-metodichesko spisanie, (7), 156–159.
Siderova, D. (2019). Communication by text in pedagogical interaction for teachers’ professional competence. CBU International Conference Proceedings, 7, 623–628. https://doi.org/10.12955/cbup.v7.1429.
Tafrova-Grigorova, A. (2013). Savremenni tendentsii v prirodonauchnoto obrazovanie na uchenitsite. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 7(1), 121–200.
Tafrova-Grigorova, A. (2016). Istoricheski koreni na konstruktivizma. Prirodnite nauki v obrazovanieto, 25(1), 75–106.
Temnikova, M. (2022). Using a frame for teaching for robust understanding (TRU) in the STEM Education in mathematics for kindergarten. Knowledge – International Journal, 53(2), 317–323.
Teneva, M. (2012). Ovladyavane na didakticheskata problematika ot studenti (Chast 1). Stara Zagora: Trakiyski universitet.
Todorova, S. (2022). Science literacy of Bulgarian students through teachers’ view. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 20(3), 203–206. https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2022.03.006.
Todorova, S. (2023). Metodi na obuchenie, izpolzvani za izgrazhdane na prirodonauchna gramotnost. Godishnik na Pedagogicheski fakultet. Trakiyski universitet, (20), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.15547/YbFE.2023.08
Tsankov, N., & Levunlieva, M. (2010). Konstruktivistkata ideia v metoda na intelektualnite karti. V Lichnostno razvitie na uchenitsite v savremennoto obrazovanie i obshtestvo (T. 4). Blagoevgrad: UI „Neofit Rilski“.
Author Info:
Dr. Stoyanka Banova Todorova, Assist. Prof.
ORCID ID: 0009-0003-5934-4238
Trakia University – Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
Faculty of Education
e-mail: stoyanka.todorova@trakia-uni.bg
English 
Български