Develops a D-STEAM laboratory model to enhance programming competencies in students, implying benefits for digital education.
The rapid digital transformation of education has increased the demand for effective approaches to developing algorithmic thinking and programming competencies among students. Although previous studies have demonstrated the positive impact of computational thinking, digital learning environments, and STEAM-based education on programming achievement, a comprehensive laboratory model integrating these components within a unified educational framework remains insufficiently explored. This study aims to develop and theoretically substantiate a D-STEAM (Digital Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) laboratory based on a system-algorithmic approach for enhancing programming competencies. The proposed model consists of three sequential stages: algorithmic thinking formation, programming implementation, and interdisciplinary STEAM project development. A criterion-based assessment framework was designed to evaluate algorithm quality, coding proficiency, problem-solving effectiveness, and interdisciplinary integration. The model combines theoretical instruction, practical programming activities, modeling tasks, and project-based learning within a single educational environment. The findings suggest that the D-STEAM laboratory provides a structured mechanism for improving computational thinking, algorithmic reasoning, coding skills, and creative problem-solving abilities. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the development of a system-algorithmic educational model that integrates programming education with interdisciplinary STEAM principles. The practical significance of the research is associated with the possibility of implementing the proposed laboratory model in secondary, vocational, and higher education institutions to support competency-based digital education and prepare learners for the challenges of the modern technological society.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xayitova Dilovar (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: