Publikationen

Mapping Collaborations in STEM Education: A Scoping Review and Typology of In-School–Out-of-School Partnerships 

Abstract
In-school–out-of-school collaborations are increasingly recognized as a key mechanism for enriching STEM education. Guided by conceptual frameworks on boundary crossing and STEM learning ecologies, this scoping review maps and synthesizes findings from 470 studies and 469 programs published between 2014 and 2024, focusing on how such partnerships are reported, structured, and distributed across educational contexts. Approximately 73% of the programs reported some form of collaboration, although often in general terms. The most common forms included shared infrastructure, recruitment coordination, and personnel involvement. More pedagogically grounded forms, such as curricular alignment and co-development of instruction, were rarely described. Collaboration patterns varied across program types, durations, subject areas, and participant target groups. A typology of seven collaboration categories was developed to organize the findings. Notable gaps include the near-total absence of collaboration in medicine-related programs and the underrepresentation of research from low- and middle-income countries. Although collaboration is frequently mentioned, it is seldom described in enough detail to support systematic analysis or theoretical insight. The review recommends more precise definitions, stronger reporting practices, and enhanced theoretical engagement with collaboration as a pedagogical and systemic component of STEM education. The proposed typology provides a foundation for more coherent future research and comparative studies.

Ziegler, A., Shiani, M., Wengler, D., & Stoeger, H. (2025). Mapping Collaborations in STEM Education: A Scoping Review and Typology of In-School–Out-of-School Partnerships. Education Sciences, 15(11), 1513. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111513 

Robust and semi-robust findings from giftedness and talent research: Results of a secondary-order scoping review on meta-analyses

Abstract
In this second-order scoping review—that is, a broad overview of research on a particular topic, identifying key concepts and evidence gaps—we (a) provide an overview of robust (and semi-robust) findings in giftedness and talent research and (b) identify areas where giftedness and talent research has not yet produced robust (and semi-robust) findings. Of the 23 meta-analyses published between 2000 and 2023 that were identified using our search terms, 17 were categorized as robust and six as semi-robust. The most frequently considered outcome variables were achievement, cognitive processing, socioemotional factors, traits, and identification. Further topics included interventions’ effects and group differences, particularly regarding groups underrepresented in gifted education. The findings are summarized in a condensed list. The lack of standard definitions and operationalizations of crucial terms is particularly critical. We suggest that further meta-research should be used to identify robust findings on giftedness.

Popp, C., Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2025). Robust and semi-robust findings from giftedness and talent research: Results of a secondary-order scoping review on meta-analyses. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 01623532251372590. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532251372590

Attracting and developing STEMM talent toward excellence and innovation

Abstract
This article provides an overview of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical sciences (STEMM) talent development from first exposure to a STEMM domain to achieving eminence and innovation. To this end, a resource-oriented model of STEMM talent development is proposed as a framework. It includes a three-stage phase model based on Bloom (1985), with the main focus on interest development in the first stage, skill acquisition toward expertise and excellence in the second stage, and style formation toward eminence and innovation in the final stage. A literature review shows that from an educational perspective, each phase is mainly characterized by the focus that Bloom postulated. However, it is important that all three stages (i.e., interest development, skill acquisition, and style formation) occur in a stage-typical manner. To explain how these primary objectives of STEMM development can be supported through STEMM talent education, Ziegler and Stoeger's (2011) educational and learning capital framework is used in the proposed resource-based model. A literature review shows that consistent provisioning of the resources specified in the model is necessary for individuals to complete a learning pathway to STEMM eminence and innovation.

Stoeger, H., Luo, L., & Ziegler, A. (2024). Attracting and developing STEMM talent toward excellence and innovation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1533(1), 89-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15108

Talent denied: Equity and excellence gaps in STEMM

Abstract
In principle, there could be STEMM talent everywhere if there were sufficient and adequate opportunities and learning resources everywhere. The reality, however, is that the likelihood of developing one’s talent in STEMM is tied to membership in social groups. In this contribution, we explore the implications of this statement with multiple examples for different social groups and for different stages of talent development. We propose an educational framework model for analyzing equity gaps in STEMM talent development that identifies and systematizes the unequal and inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities as the proximal cause of the emergence of such equity gaps. Furthermore, we discuss important aspects for closing equity gaps in STEMM talent development. We argue that — similar to public health approaches — the focus in establishing equity in STEMM talent development should be on prevention rather than intervention. We discuss the importance of the cooperation of societal subsystems and argue for the use of adequate methods of disparity detection for creating equal opportunities. We also outline why preventive strategies are crucial for the creation of ressource parity and explain why outcome standards should be considered obligatory.

Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H. (2023). Talent denied: Equity and excellence gaps in STEMM. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1530(1), 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15083