Exploring Student Technology and Engineering Literacy in Science Learning: an Overview of the Initial Study


Defrizal Hamka , Riandi , Irma Rahma Suwarma






Vol. 10 No. 3 (2024): March


Technology and Engineering Literacy, 21st century Skills, Science Learning

Research Articles


How to Cite

Hamka, D., Riandi, R., & Suwarma, I. R. (2024). Exploring Student Technology and Engineering Literacy in Science Learning: an Overview of the Initial Study . Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(3), 1188–1194. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i3.6872


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...


Technological and engineering literacy is a capability that must be imparted to students in order to be able to compete globally and be able to solve 21st century problems. This study aims to describe aspects of technological and technical literacy of junior high school students. This type of research is descriptive quantitative analysis. Data were obtained from technological and technical literacy test instruments. The test instrument is adopted from tests issued by NAEP. Data were analyzed quantitatively. The research results show that 69.2% in the complete category, 15.4% in the Partial category and incomplete in the Understanding of Technology Principles aspect. The aspect of Developing Solutions and Achieving Goals as many as 54.8% of students fall into the complete category, 19.2% in the Satisfactory category, 15.4% the Essential category, 7.7% the Partial category, and 26.9% incomplete category. Meanwhile, the Communication and Collaboration aspect, 65.4% were in the complete category, and 34.6% were in the incomplete category. three types of assessment targets in the three main TEL assessment areas, with the most complete category being Gather and Organize data and information, followed by Identification of examples of systems or processes and Representation of alternative analysis and solutions. Science learning involving real experiences and design and engineering processes related to technological principles will make students technologically and engineering literate and can improve students' critical thinking and problem solving abilities.


Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., & Pantoya, M. L. (2016). Engineering Literacy and Engagement in Kindergarten Classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(4), 630–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20151

Ahmad, J., & Wibawa, F. A. (2021). Peran Literasi Teknologi Dalam Pembelajaran Daring. Jurnal Lentera Pendidikan Pusat Penelitian Lppm Um Metro, 6(2), 237–243. Retrieved from http://www.ojs.ummetro.ac.id/index.php/lentera/article/view/1820

Anjarsari, P., Prasetyo, Z. K., & Susanti, K. (2020). Developing technology and engineering literacy for Junior High School students through STEM-based science learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1440(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1440/1/012107

Apriyani, R., Ramalis, T. R., & Suwarma, I. R. (2019). Analyzing Student’s Problem Solving Abilities of Direct Current Electricity in STEM-based Learning. Journal of Science Learning, 2(3), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v2i3.17559

Avsec, S., & Jamšek, J. (2016). Technological literacy for students aged 6–18: a new method for holistic measuring of knowledge, capabilities, critical thinking and decision-making. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9299-y

Avsec, S., & Jamšek, J. (2018). A path model of factors affecting secondary school students’ technological literacy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9382-z

Beogard, G. (2021). A list of Skills for The 21st Century. Journal of Educational Studies and Technology, 45(2), 45–61.

Buckler, C., Koperski, K., & Loveland, T. (2018). Is computer science compatible with technological literacy? Technology and Engineering Teacher, 77(4), 15–20. Retrieved from https://www.purdue.edu/in-mac/assets/pdf/TET77-4web-2.pdf#page=15

Ceha, R., Prasetyaningsih, E., Bachtiar, I., & Nana S., A. (2016). Peningkatan Kemampuan Guru Dalam Pemanfaatan Teknologi Informasi Pada Kegiatan Pembelajaran. ETHOS (Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengabdian), 131. https://doi.org/10.29313/ethos.v0i0.1693

Firman, H., Rustaman, N. Y., & Suwarma, I. R. (2016). Development Technology and Engineering Literacy Through STEM-Based Education. In 2015 International Conference on Innovation in Engineering and Vocational Education, 209–212. https://doi.org/10.2991/icieve-15.2016.45

Fraile, M. N., Peñalva-Vélez, A., & Lacambra, A. M. M. (2018). Development of digital competence in secondary education teachers’ training. Education Sciences, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8030104

Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Stem) Project-Based Learning (Pbl) Affects High, Middle, and Low Achievers Differently: the Impact of Student Factors on Achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 1089–1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9526-0

ITEEA. (2020). Standards for Technological and Engineering Literacy The Role of Technology and Engineering in STEM Education. Technical Foundation of America and the National Science Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.iteea.org/File.aspx?id=168785&v=fb52b0c8%0Ahttps://www.iteea.org/stel.aspx

Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Roberts, T., Yost, C., & Fowler, A. (2021). Equity-Oriented Conceptual Framework for K-12 STEM literacy. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00294-z

Julia, J., & Isrokatun, I. (2019). Technology literacy and student practice: Lecturing critical evaluation skills. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(9), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.9.6

Lee, C.-S. (2021). Exploring the Assessment of Technology and Engineering Literacy in the United States. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 27(3), 137–154.

Lin, C. L., & Chiang, J. K. (2019). Using 6E model in STEM teaching activities to improve university students’ learning satisfaction: A case of development seniors IoT smart cane creative design. Journal of Internet Technology, 20(7), 2109–2116. https://doi.org/10.3966/160792642019122007009

Lin, K. Y., Hsiao, H. S., Williams, P. J., & Chen, Y. H. (2020). Effects of 6E-oriented STEM practical activities in cultivating middle school students’ attitudes toward technology and technological inquiry ability. Research in Science and Technological Education, 38(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1561432

Lin, K. Y., Wu, Y. T., Hsu, Y. T., & Williams, P. J. (2021). Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers’ engineering design thinking. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00258-9

Long, N. T., Yen, N. T. H., & Van Hanh, N. (2020). The role of experiential learning and engineering design process in k-12 stem education. International Journal of Education and Practice, 8(4), 720–732. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2020.84.720.732

López-Meneses, E., Sirignano, F. M., Vázquez-Cano, E., & Ramírez-Hurtado, J. M. (2020). University students’ digital competence in three areas of the DigCom 2.1 model: A comparative study at three European universities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.14742/AJET.5583

Miska, J. W., Mathews, L., Driscoll, J., Hoffenson, S., Crimmins, S., Espera, A., & Pitterson, N. (2022). How do undergraduate engineering students conceptualize product design? An analysis of two third-year design courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 111(3), 616–641. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20468

Nation Assessment Govering Board. (2018). Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework for the 2018 National Assessment of Educational Progress. The National Academies Press.

National Assessment Governing Board. (2012). Technological Literacy Assessment and Item Specifications for the 2012 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Contract.

National Assessment Governing Board. (2018). Technology and Engineering Literacy Framework for the 2018 National Assessment of Educational Progress. The National Academies Press.

Nugroho, O. F., Permanasari, A., & Firman, H. (2019). Program Belajar berbasis STEM untuk Pembelajaran IPA: Tinjauan Pustaka, dengan Referensi di Indonesia. Jurnal Eksakta Pendidikan (Jep), 3(2), 117. https://doi.org/10.24036/jep/vol3-iss2/328

Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2013). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. In The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13398

Pramasdyahsari, A. S., Setyawati, R. D., Aini, S. N., Nusuki, U., Arum, J. P., Astutik, I. D., Widodo, W., Zuliah, N., & Salmah, U. (2023). Fostering students’ mathematical critical thinking skills on number patterns through digital book STEM PjBL. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2297. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13342

Purwaningsih, E., Sari, S. P., Sari, A. M., & ... (2020). The Effect of STEM-PjBL and Discovery Learning on Improving Students' Problem-Solving Skills of Impulse and Momentum Topic. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(4), 465-476. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/jpii/article/view/26432

Ridlo, S. (2020). Critical thinking skills reviewed from communication skills of the primary school students in STEM-based project-based learning model. Journal of Primary Education, 9(3), 311-320. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/jpe/article/view/27573

Shakrani, S. M., & Pearson, G. (2012). NAEP 2012 technological literacy framework and specifications development: Issues and recommendations. National Assessment Governing Board.

Shukshina, L. V., Gegel, L. A., Erofeeva, M. A., Levina, I. D., Chugaeva, U. Y., & Nikitin, O. D. (2021). STEM and STEAM Education in Russian Education: Conceptual Framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(10), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11184

Simarro, C., & Couso, D. (2021). Engineering practices as a framework for STEM education: a proposal based on epistemic nuances. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00310-2

Sommer, M., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2018). Impact of the flipped classroom on learner achievement and satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17, 159–182. https://doi.org/10.28945/4059

Sriyanto, B. (2021). Meningkatkan Keterampilan 4c dengan Literasi Digital di SMP Negeri 1 Sidoharjo. Jurnal Didaktika Pendidikan Dasar, 5(1), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.26811/didaktika.v5i1.291

Sulistiowati, D., Surtikanti, H. K., & Suwarma, I. R. (2019). Investigating scientific literacy of students on the topic of water pollution through STEM based 6E learning by design. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022038

Sumarni, W., & Kadarwati, S. (2020). Ethno-stem project-based learning: Its impact to critical and creative thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(1), 11-21. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/jpii/article/view/21754

Techakosit, S., & Nilsook, P. (2018). The development of STEM literacy using the learning process of scientific imagineering through AR. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(1), 230–238. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i01.7664

Techataweewan, W., & Prasertsin, U. (2018). Development of digital literacy indicators for Thai undergraduate students using mixed method research. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(2), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.07.001

Teo, P. (2019). Teaching for the 21st century: A case for dialogic pedagogy. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.03.009

Usnia, A. M., Prasetyo, Z. K., Wardaya, N. F., & Elviana, R. (2021). A Preliminary Study of Student’s Initial Technology and Engineering Literacy. Proceedings of the 6th International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE 2020), 541, 589–595. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210326.085

Voogt, J., & McKenney, S. (2017). TPACK in teacher education: are we preparing teachers to use technology for early literacy? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2016.1174730

Williams, C., & Beam, S. (2019). Technology and writing: Review of research. Computers & Education, 128, 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.024

Author Biographies

Defrizal Hamka, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Riandi, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Irma Rahma Suwarma, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia


Copyright (c) 2024 Defrizal Hamka, Riandi, Irma Rahma Suwarma

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).