Spatial and ecological thinking in STEM/STEAM-based school geography education: a systematic review

Introduction Spatial and ecological/environmental thinking are central to geography education because students must interpret spatial patterns, analyse human–environment relationships, and reason about complex geographical problems. STEM/STEAM approaches may support these competencies through interdisciplinary inquiry and geospatial technologies, yet existing evidence remains fragmented. This systematic review aimed to synthesize and critically evaluate how STEM/STEAM-oriented school geography education addresses and assesses spatial and ecological/environmental thinking. Methods The review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Searches and database exports from Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, ERIC, and Lens Scholarly Works provided 1,501 records for screening before deduplication. Peer-reviewed primary empirical studies in formal school geography or school-based interdisciplinary contexts with a substantive geography component were eligible when spatial/geospatial or ecological/environmental thinking was directly assessed or explicitly targeted. Twenty-two reports underwent full-text assessment. Due to methodological and conceptual heterogeneity, a structured narrative synthesis was conducted, and methodological quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Results Eleven studies were included. STEM/STEAM-oriented geography was implemented through GIS and Web GIS, digital mapping, OpenStreetMap, virtual reality, virtual globes, mobile resources, and project-, inquiry-, blended-, and flipped-learning approaches. Spatial and geospatial thinking were the dominant outcomes and were assessed using spatial-thinking tests, performance tasks, coded reasoning, curriculum-aligned assessments, questionnaires, and teacher-reported evidence. Direct student measures generally indicated positive spatial-learning outcomes, although evidence strength varied across designs and instruments. Ecological/environmental thinking was rarely operationalized as a distinct measured construct, even when climate, sustainability, or other environmental contexts were central to instruction. Discussion The evidence is stronger for STEM/STEAM-supported spatial reasoning than for the integrated development of spatial and ecological/environmental thinking. Educational value appears to depend less on technology alone than on its integration with authentic geographical problems, interdisciplinary inquiry, and reasoning. Future research should explicitly define and assess both cognitive domains within common pedagogical models, use stronger comparative designs and validated measures, and examine transfer and retention.