Online STEM Education Before COVID-19: An Integrative Review and Thematic Framework for Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v30i3.5763Keywords:
Online STEM education, online learning, higher education, integrative literature review, equity in STEM, faculty developmentAbstract
Scholarship on online STEM education in higher education has been dispersed across disciplinary and educational research communities. This integrative literature review synthesized studies published from 2011 through early 2020 to establish a historical baseline for online STEM teaching and learning before the COVID-19 pandemic. Searches were conducted in EBSCO, ERIC, and Web of Science using terms related to STEM education, online and distance learning, and higher education. The final body of literature comprised 33 studies published across 31 scholarly outlets. Inductive thematic synthesis produced eight categories: (1) Online STEM Learner Support; (2) Integrated Online STEM Education; (3) Online STEM Course Quality, Design, and Learner Success; (4) Strategies for Improving Online Learner Engagement in STEM; (5) Communication in Online STEM Environments; (6) Equity and Inclusion for Underrepresented Learners in Online STEM; (7) Online STEM Education and Workforce Development; and (8) Online STEM Faculty Preparation. Across asynchronous, synchronous, combined-online, and selected blended contexts, the reviewed literature linked learner experiences and outcomes more closely to the integration of instructional design, interaction, facilitation, authenticity, assessment, learner support, access, and equity than to modality alone. These dimensions operated interdependently across the eight themes. The review also revealed uneven methodological scale and theoretical grounding across the literature. By synthesizing this body of research, the review provides a thematic framework for interpreting pandemic-era and post-pandemic developments and advancing more rigorous, theoretically grounded, and equity-centered research in online STEM education.
References
American Council on Education. (2020, April 9). Higher education fourth supplemental letter to Senate Majority Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Schumer [Letter]. https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Letter-Senate-Higher-Ed-Supplemental-Request-040920.pdf
Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2011). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). AU Press.
Arno-Macià, E., & Rueda-Ramos, C. (2011). Promoting reflection on science, technology, and society among engineering students through an EAP online learning environment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.12.004
Baim, S. A. (2016). Building professional social media communications skills: A STEM-originated course with university-wide student appeal. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 27(2), 155–182. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1104014
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bean, J. P. (1982). Student attrition, intentions, and confidence: Interaction effects in a path model. Research in Higher Education, 17(4), 291–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00977899
Bosch, N., Huang, E., Angrave, L., & Perry, M. (2019). Modeling improvement for underrepresented minorities in online STEM education. In Proceedings of the 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP ‘19), Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) (pp. 327–335).
https://doi.org/10.1145/3320435.3320463
Breiner, J. M., Harkness, M., 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
Butcher, J., Clarke, A., Wood, C., McPherson, E., & Fowle, W. (2019). How does a STEM access module prepare adult learners to succeed in undergraduate science? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(9), 1271–1283. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1228873
Campbell, A., Gallen, A. M., Jones, M. H., & Walshe, A. (2019). The perceptions of STEM tutors on the role of tutorials in distance learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 34(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1544488
Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Melton, M. (2011). STEM: Science, technology, engineering, mathematics. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/stem-complete.pdf
Chen, B., Bastedo, K., & Howard, W. (2018). Exploring design elements for online STEM courses: Active learning, engagement & assessment design. Online Learning, 22(2), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1369
Chen, X. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014-001). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014001rev.pdf
Christe, B. (2015). Implementation of an asynchronous workshop for STEM educators designed to enhance professor-student rapport. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 26(4), 9–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1082710
Corbett, C. & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the equation: The variables for women’s success in engineering and computing. American Association of University Women (AAUW), Washington, D.C. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED580805
Davis, K. S., & Snyder, W. (2012). Fostering science education in an online environment: Are we there yet? Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(2), 24–31. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ999485
Dawson, A. E., Bernstein, B. L., & Bekki, J. M. (2015). Providing the psychosocial benefits of mentoring to women in STEM: CareerWISE as an online solution. New Directions for Higher Education, 2015(171), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20142
DeBoer, J., Haney, C., Atiq, S. Z., Smith, C., & Cox, D. (2019). Hands-on engagement online: Using a randomized control trial to estimate the impact of an at-home lab kit on student attitudes and achievement in a MOOC. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(1–2), 234–252. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1203328
Derting, T. L., Ebert-May, D., Henkel, T. P., Maher, J. M., Arnold, B., & Passmore, H. A. (2016). Assessing faculty professional development in STEM higher education: Sustainability of outcomes. Science Advances, 2(3), e1501422. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1501422
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The online student engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561
Doo, M. Y., Zhu, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2023). A systematic review of the research topics in online learning during COVID-19: Documenting the sudden shift. Online Learning, 27(1), 15–45. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3405
Downs, H. A. (2014). Evaluation in STEM online graduate degree programs in agricultural sciences and engineering. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 5, 1–18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1060613.pdf
Ebert-May, D., Derting, T., Hodder, J., Momsen, J., Long, T., & Jardeleza, S. (2011). What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. BioScience, 61(7), 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9
Elrod, S. (2010). Project Kaleidoscope 2.0: Leadership for twenty-first century STEM education. Liberal Education, 96(4), 24–33. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ923879
English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K–12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
Entangled Solutions, & Alexander, B. (2020, April 27). COVID-19: Higher education resource center. Entangled Solutions. https://www.entangled.solutions/coronavirus-he
Fiore, S. M., Rodriguez, W. E., & Carstens, D. S. (2012). uCollaborator: Framework for STEM project collaboration among geographically-dispersed student/faculty teams. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(2), 84–92. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ978729
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder & Herder.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Geiger, V., Mulligan, J., Date-Huxtable, L., Ahlip, R., Jones, D., May, E. J., Rylands, L. J., & Wright, I. (2018). An interdisciplinary approach to designing online learning: Fostering pre-service mathematics teachers’ capabilities in mathematical modelling. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0920-x
Gibbons, J. A. (1979). Curriculum integration. Curriculum Inquiry, 9(4), 321–332. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ216032
Goodman, J., Melkers, J., & Pallais, A. (2019). Can online delivery increase access to education? Journal of Labor Economics, 37(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1086/698895
Graves, L., Asunda, P. A., Plant, S. J., & Goad, C. (2011). Asynchronous online access as an accommodation on students with learning disabilities and/or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorders in postsecondary STEM courses. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(4), 317–330. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ966132
Hachey, A. C., Wladis, C., & Conway, K. M. (2015). Prior online course experience and GPA as predictors of subsequent online STEM course outcomes. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.10.003
Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439
Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. American Association of University Women. https://www.aauw.org/app/uploads/2020/03/why-so-few-research.pdf
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM integration in K–12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18612
Hossain, Z., Bumbacher, E., Brauneis, A., Diaz, M., Saltarelli, A., Blikstein, P., & Riedel-Kruse, I. H. (2018). Design guidelines and empirical case study for scaling authentic inquiry-based science learning via open online courses and interactive biology cloud labs. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(4), 478–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0150-3
Hutton, C., & Robson, J. (2019). Breaking barriers, building community: Improving student engagement with preparation for studying online multidisciplinary science by distance learning—A case study. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.29311/ndtps.v0i14.3217
Johnston, J. (2018). The effects of blended online learning in higher education STEM courses: Experimental evidence from Mongolia (CEPA Working Paper No. 18–11). Stanford Center for Education Policy Analysis. https://cepa.stanford.edu/content/effects-blended-online-learning-higher-education-stem-courses-experimental-evidence-mongolia
Knowles, M. S. (1973). The adult learner: A neglected species. Gulf Publishing. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED084368
Krishnamurthi, M., & Richter, S. (2013, March). Promoting STEM education through mobile teaching and learning. Paper presented at the International Association for Development of the Information Society (IADIS) International Conference on Mobile Learning, Lisbon, Portugal. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562382
Kumi-Yeboah, A., & Amponsah, S. (2023). An exploratory study of instructors’ perceptions on inclusion of culturally responsive pedagogy in online education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(4), 878–897. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13299
Kysilka, M. L. (1998). Understanding integrated curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 9(2), 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958517970090206
Lederman, D. (2020, April 27). Presidents’ biggest COVID-19 worries? Low-income students and colleges’ financial strain. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/presidents-biggest-covid-19-worries-low-income-students-and-colleges-financial-strain
Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science Education, 91(5), 822–839. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20209
Maldonado, E., & Pearson, K. R. (2013). Building STEAM in design-related technology. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 42(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.42.2.e
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, Article 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 115(3), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why (ASHE Higher Education Report, 40). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018
Mohammadi, A., Grosskopf, K., & Killingsworth, J. (2019). Workforce development through online experiential learning for STEM education. Adult Learning, 31(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159519854547
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (NASEM, 2018). Graduate STEM education for the 21st century. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25038
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (NASEM, 2020). Promising practices for addressing the underrepresentation of women in science, engineering, and medicine: Opening doors. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25585
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Fast facts: Distance learning. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=80
National Research Council. (NRC, 2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press.
https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/13165
National Science Board. (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2018. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/assets/nsb20181.pdf
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (NSF, 2023). Diversity and STEM: Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities 2023 (NSF 23–315). https://www.nsf.gov/reports/statistics/diversity-stem-women-minorities-persons-disabilities-2023
Picciano, A. G. (2017). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learning, 21(3), 166–190. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1225
Ramlo, S. (2017). Student views regarding online freshmen physics courses. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(4), 461–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1353961
Reid, J., & Wilkes, J. (2016). Developing and applying quantitative skills maps for STEM curricula, with a focus on different modes of learning. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(6), 837–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1144814
Rennar-Potacco, D., & Orellana, A. (2018). Academically supporting STEM students from a distance through videoconferencing: Lessons learned. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(2), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2018.1446121
Rennar-Potacco, D., Orellana, A., Chen, P., & Salazar, A. (2019). Rethinking academic support: Improving the academic outcomes of students in high-risk STEM courses with synchronous videoconferencing. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 20(4), 455–474. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201691
Rozek, C. S., Ramirez, G., Fine, R. D., & Beilock, S. L. (2019). Reducing socioeconomic disparities in the STEM pipeline through student emotion regulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(5), 1553–1558. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1808589116
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ821633
Sanga, C., Magesa, M. M., Chingonikaya, E., & Kayunze, K. A. (2013). Can e-learning promote participation of female students in STEM disciplines in higher learning institutions of Tanzania? International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 9(3), 86–102. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1071373
Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). “It’s the nature of the beast”: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10021
Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group.
https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdf
Seymour, E., & Hunter, A.-B. (Eds.). (2019). Talking about leaving revisited: Persistence, relocation, and loss in undergraduate STEM education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2
Sgro, C. M., Bobowski, T., & Oliveira, A. W. (2020). Current praxis and conceptualization of STEM education: A call for greater clarity in integrated curriculum development. In V. L. Akerson & G. A. Buck (Eds.), Critical questions in STEM education (Vol. 51, pp. 185–210). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57646-2_11
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721–1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.017
Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic literature review of definitions of online learning (1988–2018). American Journal of Distance Education, 33(4), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082
Spaniol-Mathews, P., Letourneau, L. E., & Rice, E. (2016). The impact of online supplemental instruction on academic performance and persistence in undergraduate STEM courses. Supplemental Instruction Journal, 2(1), 19–32. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED600833
State University of New York [SUNY]. (2025). Online learning data definitions. https://online.suny.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Online-Learning-Definitions-June-2025.pdf
Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157–190. https://doi.org/10.28945/3502
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge-building communities: Consistency, contact, and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.2190/W4G6-HY52-57P1-PPNE
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89–125. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543045001089
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. University of Chicago Press.
Vakil, S., McKinney de Royston, M., Suad Nasir, N., & Kirshner, B. (2016). Rethinking race and power in design-based research: Reflections from the field. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 194–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2016.1169817
van Dorresteijn, C., Fajardo-Tovar, D., Pareja Roblin, N., Cornelissen, F., Meij, M., Voogt, J., & Volman, M. (2025). What factors contribute to effective online higher education? A meta-review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30, 171–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09750-5
Wallace, R. M. (2003). Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 241–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636310303143
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Wladis, C., Conway, K. M., & Hachey, A. C. (2015). The online STEM classroom—Who succeeds? An exploration of the impact of ethnicity, gender, and non-traditional student characteristics in the community college context. Community College Review, 43(2), 142–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552115571729
Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K. M. (2014). An investigation of course-level factors as predictors of online STEM course outcomes. Computers & Education, 77, 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.015
Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K. M. (2015). The representation of minority, female, and non-traditional STEM majors in the online environment at community colleges: A nationally representative study. Community College Review, 43(1), 89–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114555904
Woodley, X., Hernández, C., Parra, J., & Negash, B. (2017). Celebrating difference: Best practices in culturally responsive teaching online. TechTrends, 61(5), 470–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0207-z
Wu, B., Hu, Y., & Wang, M. (2019). Scaffolding design thinking in online STEM preservice teacher training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2271–2287. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12873
Yang, D., & Baldwin, S. J. (2020). Using technology to support student learning in an integrated STEM learning environment. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(1), 1–11. https://ijtes.net/index.php/ijtes/article/view/1592
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alejandra M. Pickett
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
