Tendências, lacunas e recomendações na adoção de inovações: uma revisão sistemática da literatura na Educação em Ciências
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci/2026v31n1p465Palavras-chave:
Adoção de inovações, Educação em Ciências, STEM, Revisão de LiteraturaResumo
A adoção de inovações na educação é um tema relevante diante das rápidas evoluções tecnológicas e metodológicas que buscam atender às necessidades dos alunos. Na Educação em Ciências, essas inovações têm o potencial de transformar os ambientes educacionais com abordagens mais interativas e eficazes. Contudo, a implementação não é uniforme, sendo influenciada por fatores contextuais, formação docente e características das inovações. Realizamos uma revisão sistemática da literatura para investigar como a adoção de inovações é tratada nas pesquisas em Educação em Ciências, e analisamos 55 artigos. Os resultados destacam metodologias e métodos ativos e tecnologias emergentes, mas também apontam desafios estruturais e limitações na formação docente. O estudo contribui ao identificar tendências, recomendações e a necessidade de alinhamento teórico mais consistente, oferecendo base para futuras investigações e práticas educacionais.Referências
Álvarez-Marín, A., Velázquez-Iturbide, J. Á., & Castillo-Vergara, M. (2023). The acceptance of augmented reality in engineering education: The role of technology optimism and technology innovativeness. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(6), 3409–3421. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1928710
Alves, M., & Bego, A. M. (2020). A Celeuma em Torno da Temática do Planejamento Didático-Pedagógico: Definição e Caracterização de seus Elementos Constituintes. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 71–96. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u7196
Andrews, M. E., Graham, M., Prince, M., Borrego, M., Finelli, C. J., & Husman, J. (2020). Student resistance to active learning: Do instructors (mostly) get it wrong? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 25(2), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2020.1861771
Apkarian, N., Henderson, C., Stains, M., Raker, J., Johnson, E., & Dancy, M. (2021). What really impacts the use of active learning in undergraduate STEM education? Results from a national survey of chemistry, mathematics, and physics instructors. PLoS ONE, 16(2), e0247544. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247544
Bathgate, M. E., Aragón, O. R., Cavanagh, A. J., Waterhouse, J. K., Frederick, J., & Graham, M. J. (2019). Perceived supports and evidence-based teaching in college STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(11), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0166-3
Borland, R., Loch, B., & McManus, L. (2015). Implementing blended learning at faculty level: Supporting staff, and the ‘ripple effect’. Proceedings of ASCILITE, 389–393. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2015.951
Borrego, M., Cutler, S., Prince, M., Henderson, C., & Froyd, J. E. (2013). Fidelity of Implementation of Research-Based Instructional Strategies (RBIS) in Engineering Science Courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(3), 394–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20020
Brito, I. S., Barros, J. P., & Rodrigues, E. (2020). Moving to Project-Based Learning at the Program Level: An Experience Report. 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, 1614–1621. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON45650.2020.9125297
Candaş, B., & Altun, T. (2023). Investigating Flipped Laboratory Practices of Science Student Teachers. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 20, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2023.010
Carroll, L. J., Reeping, D., Finelli, C. J., Prince, M. J., Husman, J., Graham, M., & Borrego, M. J. (2023). Barriers instructors experience in adopting active learning: Instrument development. Journal of Engineering Education, 112(4), 1079–1108. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20557
Chizwina, S., & Mhakure, D. (2018). Exploring how the Attributes of Technology Affect Adoption in Teaching Mathematics in a Higher Education Institution in South Africa. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(3), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2018.1499459
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). Research Synthesis as a Scientific Process. Em H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Org.), Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (3o ed., p. 3–16). Russel Sage Foundation.
Dallavis, J. W. (2023). Becoming a STEM-Focused Catholic School: Insights into Adopting a Curricular Specialization. Journal of Catholic Education, 26(2), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.2602052023
Dancy, M., Henderson, C., & Turpen, C. (2016). How faculty learn about and implement research-based instructional strategies: The case of Peer Instruction. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010110
Doğru, M. S., Yüzbaşıoğlu, F., & Arpaci, I. (2023). The effect of interactive videos enhanced with pop-up questions on teacher candidates’ learning performance in science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2023.2272820
Donovan, S., & LaMar, M. D. (2023). Using Science Education Gateways to Improve Undergraduate STEM Education: The QUBES Platform as a Case Study. Computing in Science & Engineering, 25(2), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2023.3292313
Foote, K., Knaub, A., Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Beichner, R. J. (2016). Enabling and challenging factors in institutional reform: The case of SCALE-UP. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010103
Foote, K., Neumeyer, X., Henderson, C. R., Dancy, M. H., & Beichner, R. J. (2014). SCALE-UP Implementation and Intra-Institutional Dissemination: A Case Study of Two Institutions. 2014 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, 83–86. https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2014.pr.017
Froyd, J. E., Borrego, M., Cutler, S., Henderson, C., & Prince, M. J. (2013). Estimates of Use of Research-Based Instructional Strategies in Core Electrical or Computer Engineering Courses. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 393–399. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2013.2244602
Fullan, M. (2009). O Significado da Mudança Educacional (R. C. Costa, Trad.; 4o ed.). Artmed Editora.
Gabby, S., Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2017). The case of middle and high school chemistry teachers implementing technology: Using the concerns-based adoption model to assess change processes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00193A
García, A. V. M., Pérez, B. M. G., & Martín-Lucas, J. (2021). Fases de implementación de Blended Learning en las universidades españolas: Estudio basado en análisis de segmentación. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, 34(1), 28–49. https://doi.org/10.21814/rpe.17754
Gilchrist, P. O., Grable, L. L., Young, T., Bowles, T. A., & Brady, K. P. (2017). Middle and high school teachers’ implementation reflections of photonics and optics curriculum in a qualitative study. Em X. Liu & X.-C. Zhang (Org.), 14th Conference on Education and Training in Optics and Photonics (p. 1–10). SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2270958
Glanville, J. (2019). Searching Bibliographic Databases. Em H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Org.), The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis (3o ed., p. 73–99). Russel Sage Foundation.
Gómez-Ríos, D., Ramírez-Malule, H., & Marriaga-Cabrales, N. (2023). Mesocurriculum modernization of a chemical engineering program: The case of a high-impact regional university in Colombia. Education for Chemical Engineers, 44, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.06.002
Goodwin, E. C., Cao, J. N., Fletcher, M., Flaiban, J. L., & Shortlidge, E. E. (2018). Catching the Wave: Are Biology Graduate Students on Board with Evidence-Based Teaching? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-12-0281
Henderson, C. (2005). The challenges of instructional change under the best of circumstances: A case study of one college physics instructor. American Journal of Physics, 73(8), 778–786. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1927547
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2007). Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020102
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2008). Physics faculty and educational researchers: Divergent expectations as barriers to the diffusion of innovations. American Journal of Physics, 76(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2800352
Henderson, C., Khan, R., & Dancy, M. (2018). Will my student evaluations decrease if I adopt an active learning instructional strategy? American Journal of Physics, 86(12), 934–942. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5065907
Hilpert, J. C. (2016). A Multivariate Examination of Active and Interactive Learning and Student Engagement in Post-Secondary Engineering Energy Science Classrooms: The ”Why” of Instructional Strategy Use. 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 1–16. https://peer.asee.org/a-multivariate-examination-of-active-and-interactive-learning-and-student-engagement-in-post-secondary-engineering-energy-science-classrooms-the-why-of-instructional-strategy-use.pdf
Idsardi, R., Friedly, I., Mancinelli, J., Usai, N., & Matos, L. F. (2023). Outcomes of Early Adopters Implementing the Flipped Classroom Approach in Undergraduate STEM Courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(5), 655–670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10066-9
Isaacs-Sodeye, O., & Lande, M. (2013). Teaching with unfamiliar pedagogy for engineering design instructors. 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1447–1449. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2013.6685071
Joshi, D. R., Khanal, J., & Dhakal, R. H. (2023). From Resistance to Resilience: Teachers’ Adaptation Process to Mediating Digital Devices in Pre-COVID-19, during COVID-19, and Post-COVID-19 Classrooms in Nepal. Education Sciences, 13(5), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050509
Khatri, R., Henderson, C., Cole, R., Froyd, J. E., Friedrichsen, D., & Stanford, C. (2017). Characteristics of well-propagated teaching innovations in undergraduate STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0056-5
Koretsky, M., & Magana, A. (2019). Using technology to enhance learning and engagement in engineering. Advances in Engineering Education, 7(2), 1–53. https://advances.asee.org/using-technology-to-enhance-learning-and-engagement-in-engineering/
Lee, Y., Evenhouse, D. A., Berger, E. J., Rhoads, J. F., & Deboer, J. (2022). Orchestrating a culture-aligned adoption and adaptation of an instructional innovation: A story of an engineering professor’s pedagogical decisions between innovation and school culture. ASEE 2022 Annual Conference, 1–14. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10355877
Marbach-Ad, G., & Rietschel, C. (2016). A Case Study Documenting the Process by Which Biology Instructors Transition from Teacher-Centered to Learner-Centered Teaching. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-06-0196
Marquez, R., Barrios, N., Vera, R. E., Mendez, M. E., Tolosa, L., Zambrano, F., & Li, Y. (2023). A perspective on the synergistic potential of artificial intelligence and product-based learning strategies in biobased materials education. Education for Chemical Engineers, 44, 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.05.005
Mazzarol, T., & Reboud, S. (2020). Adoption and Diffusion of Innovation. Em T. Mazzarol & S. Reboud, Entrepreneurship and Innovation (p. 165–189). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9412-6_6
McConnell, M., Montplaisir, L., & Offerdahl, E. G. (2020). A model of peer effects on instructor innovation adoption. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(53), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00255-y
Morad, S., Ragonis, N., & Barak, M. (2021). An integrative conceptual model of innovation and innovative thinking based on a synthesis of a literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40, 100824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100824
Nadelson, L., Sias, C. M., & Seifert, A. (2016). Challenges for integrating engineering into the K-12 curriculum: Indicators of K-12 teachers’ propensity to adopt innovation. 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 1–16. https://peer.asee.org/challenges-for-integrating-engineering-into-the-k-12-curriculum-indicators-of-k-12-teachers-propensity-to-adopt-innovation.pdf
Nipyrakis, A., Stavrou, D., & Avraamidou, L. (2023). Designing technology-enhanced science experiments in elementary teacher preparation: The role of learning communities. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2023.2202386
Palacio-Jiménez, D., Valencia-Quiceno, J. D., Valencia-Arias, A., & Benjumea-Arias, M. (2023). Adoption of Digital Tools Among Geoscience Students Based on the TAM Model. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 18(4), 384–392. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2023.3324027
Percheron, F., Araujo, I. S., & Espinosa, T. (2025). Inovação Didática: Uma proposta de conceitualização a partir da Teoria Antropológica do Didático. Ciência & Educação, 31, e25036. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320250036
Pertuz, S., Reyes, O., Cristobal, E. S., Meier, R., & Castro, M. (2023). MOOC-Based Flipped Classroom for On-Campus Teaching in Undergraduate Engineering Courses. IEEE Transactions on Education, 66(5), 468–478. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2023.3282896
Petter, A. A., Espinosa, T., & Araujo, I. S. (2021). Inovação didática no Ensino de Física: Um estudo sobre a adoção do método Instrução pelos Colegas (Peer Instruction) no contexto de Mestrados Profissionais em Ensino no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 43, e20210070. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9126-rbef-2021-0070
Petter, A. A., Souza, D. G. de, Espinosa, T., & Araujo, I. S. (2025). Inovação em Educação: Uma análise sistemática de revisões de literatura. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 30 (contínuo), e300017. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782025300017
Quardokus, K., & Henderson, C. (2018). Department-Level Instructional Change: Comparing Prescribed versus Emergent Strategies. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(4), ar56. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-02-0031
Riley, D., Mallouk, K., Faber, C., & Coso Strong, A. (2023). Adoption of Pedagogical Innovations: Social Networks of Engineering Education Guilds. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1102. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111102
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press.
Sachmpazidi, D., Bautista, M., Chajecki, Z., Mendoza, C., & Henderson, C. (2021). Integrating numerical modeling into an introductory physics laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 89(7), 713–720. https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0003899
Sachmpazidi, D., Olmstead, A., Thompson, A. N., Henderson, C., & Beach, A. (2021). Team-based instructional change in undergraduate STEM: Characterizing effective faculty collaboration. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(15), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00273-4
Shi, L., & Stains, M. (2021). Development of the Departmental Climate around Teaching (DCaT) survey: Neither psychological collective climate nor departmental collective climate predicts STEM faculty’s instructional practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(44), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00303-1
Silva-Díaz, F., Marfil-Carmona, R., Narváez, R., Silva Fuentes, A., & Carrillo-Rosúa, J. (2023). Introducing Virtual Reality and Emerging Technologies in a Teacher Training STEM Course. Education Sciences, 13(10), 1044. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13101044
Stewart, S., Brown, D., & Dotger, S. (2014). On Adopting Educational Materials: A Cautionary Tale. 483, 291–295. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ASPC..483..291S
Taajamaa, V., Jarvi, A., Laato, S., & Holvitie, J. (2018). Co-creative engineering curriculum design—Case East Africa. 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8658521
Tabarés, R., & Boni, A. (2023). Maker culture and its potential for STEM education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(1), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09725-y
Tavares, F. G. de O. (2019). O conceito de inovação em educação: Uma revisão necessária. Educação (UFSM), 44, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5902/1984644432311
Terzieva, V., Paunova-Hubenova, E., Dimitrov, S., & Boneva, Y. (2020). ICT in STEM Education in Bulgaria. Em M. E. Auer & T. Tsiatsos (Org.), The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education (V. 916, p. 801–812). Springer International Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11932-4_74
Turpen, C., Dancy, M., & Henderson, C. (2016). Perceived affordances and constraints regarding instructors’ use of Peer Instruction: Implications for promoting instructional change. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010116
Urban, S. (2017). Pen-Enabled, Real-Time Student Engagement for Teaching in STEM Subjects. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(8), 1051–1059. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00127
Vishnubhotla, M., Chowdhury, A., Apkarian, N., Johnson, E., Dancy, M., Henderson, C., Claire Lau, A., Raker, J. R., & Stains, M. (2022). “I use IBL in this course” may say more about an instructor’s beliefs than about their teaching. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 8(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00186-9
Walter, E. M., Beach, A. L., Henderson, C., Williams, C. R., & Ceballos-Madrigal, I. (2021). Understanding Conditions for Teaching Innovation in Postsecondary Education: Development and Validation of the Survey of Climate for Instructional Improvement (SCII). International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(2), 166–199. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.46
Wanyama, S. B., McQuaid, R. W., & Kittler, M. (2022). Where you search determines what you find: The effects of bibliographic databases on systematic reviews. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(3), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1892378
Yik, B. J., Raker, J. R., Apkarian, N., Stains, M., Henderson, C., Dancy, M. H., & Johnson, E. (2022). Association of malleable factors with adoption of research-based instructional strategies in introductory chemistry, mathematics, and physics. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1016415. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1016415
Zhu, Y., Wang, M., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Building Learning Communities Among English Learners in STEM Majors—Case Studies of Undergraduates in Chinese Universities. 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9225944
Zich, R., Sammons, A., & Rosenblatt, R. (2020). A revision of a traditional astronomy course through active learning. 2019 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, 687–692. https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Zich
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2026 Felippe Percheron, Tobias Espinosa, Ives Solano Araujo
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
A IENCI é uma revista de acesso aberto (Open Access), sem que haja a necessidade de pagamentos de taxas, seja para submissão ou processamento dos artigos. A revista adota a definição da Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), ou seja, os usuários possuem o direito de ler, baixar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar e fazer links diretos para os textos completos dos artigos nela publicados.
O autor responsável pela submissão representa todos os autores do trabalho e, ao enviar o artigo para a revista, está garantindo que tem a permissão de todos para fazê-lo. Da mesma forma, assegura que o artigo não viola direitos autorais e que não há plágio no trabalho. A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões emitidas.
Todos os artigos são publicados com a licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional. Os autores mantém os direitos autorais sobre suas produções, devendo ser contatados diretamente se houver interesse em uso comercial dos trabalhos.
