The STEM+ Research Coaching Framework: Integrating Authentic Inquiry, Human–AI Co-Intelligence, and STEM Identity Development
Resumen
The rapid expansion of generative artificial intelligence, authentic inquiry, and interdisciplinary STEM+ education has renewed interest in understanding how STEM identity develops in contemporary educational contexts. Although previous research has substantially advanced knowledge of STEM identity, authentic inquiry, mentoring, and artificial intelligence in education, these perspectives have largely evolved as parallel research traditions, providing limited guidance for intentionally designing Relational Research Ecosystems in which they operate as an integrated pedagogical system. This integrative literature review analyzes and integrates scholarship on STEM identity, authentic inquiry, mentoring, relational pedagogy, Human–AI Co-Intelligence, and twenty-first-century competencies to develop the STEM+ Research Coaching Framework, a relational pedagogical framework for intentionally designing Relational Research Ecosystems. The framework conceptualizes STEM+ Research Coaching as an integrated relational process in which Methodological Coherence, Intentional Mentoring, Strategic Questioning, Human–AI Co-Intelligence, and Reflective Meaning-Making function as five complementary mechanisms that collectively cultivate authentic inquiry, collaborative knowledge co-construction, scientific agency, and STEM identity development. Rather than conceptualizing artificial intelligence as a tool for task automation, the framework positions Human–AI Co-Intelligence as a relational pedagogical process that supports collaborative knowledge co-construction while preserving human intentionality, disciplinary judgment, ethical responsibility, and critical reflection. By integrating complementary theoretical traditions, the framework shifts the focus from explaining why STEM identity develops toward understanding how educators intentionally cultivate it through the orchestration of Relational Research Ecosystems.
Descargas
Citas
Akudjedu, T. N., Ago, J. L., Iweka, E., & Dushimirimana, S. (2026). Evidence synthesis strategies and indications for scoping and systematic reviews: A methodological guide and recommendations for radiography research. Radiography, 32(1), 103238.
Bartels, K. P. (2024). Relational ecosystems. International Journal of the Commons, 18(1), 231–245.
Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2010). We be burnin'! Agency, identity, and science learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 187–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530044
Burke, P. J., & Tully, J. C. (1977). The measurement of role identity. Social Forces, 55(4), 881–897.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2577560
Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187–1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237
Casebourne, I., Shi, S., Hogan, M., Holmes, W., Hoel, T., Wegerif, R., & Yuan, L. (2025). Using AI to support education for collective intelligence. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(3), 1597–1629.
Chen, P. (2026). Asking better questions: Strategic questioning as a psychologically wise intervention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 21(1), 80–95.
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251383825
Cohen, G. L. (2022). Belonging: The science of creating connection and bridging divides. WW Norton & Company.
Collazos Guzmán, G. (2025). Nueva Teoría Estratégica: Marco relacional para el desarrollo de la identidad digital STEM. Estudios y Perspectivas, 5(2), 2286–2303.
https://doi.org/10.61384/r.c.a.v5i2.1276
Darragh, L. (2016). Identity research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 93(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9696-5
Davoudi, M., & Sadeghi, N. A. (2015). A systematic review of research on questioning as a high-level cognitive strategy. English Language Teaching, 8(10), 76–90.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n10p76
DeJarnette, N. K. (2018). Implementing STEAM in the early childhood classroom. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 18. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/3878
Dou, R., & Cian, H. (2022). Constructing STEM identity: An expanded structural model for STEM identity research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(3), 458-490.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., Quaglia, R., Smith, D., & Lande, L. (2017). Engagement by Design: Creating Learning Environments Where Students Thrive.
Gee, J. P. (2000). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X025001099
Godwin, A., Potvin, G., Hazari, Z., & Lock, R. (2013, October). Understanding engineering identity through structural equation modeling. In 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 50-56). IEEE.
Gordon, C. (1976). Development of evaluated role identities. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 405-433.
Grimalt-Álvaro, C., Couso, D., Boixadera-Planas, E., & Godec, S. (2022). “I see myself as a STEM person”: Exploring high school students’ self-identification with STEM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(5), 720–745. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21742
Guo, D., Yang, D., Zhang, H., et al. (2025). DeepSeek-R1 incentivizes reasoning in LLMs through reinforcement learning. Nature, 645, 633–638. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09422-z
Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978–1003. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20363
Hoffer, W. W. (2016). Cultivating STEM identities: Strengthening student and teacher mindsets in math and science. Heinemann.
Hwang, S., Hwang, S., Lee, S., Kim, D., & Lee, K. (2026). Augmentiary: Exploring how LLM-generated interpretive feedback supports meaning-making in reflective journaling. In Proceedings of the 2026 Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS ’26). ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3800645.3812859
Ignelzi, M. (2000). Meaning-making in the learning and teaching process. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2000(82), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.8201
Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2017). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (6th ed.). SAGE.
King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children's problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational psychology, 83(3), 307.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Mollick, E. (2024). Co-intelligence: Living and working with AI. Portfolio/Penguin Random House.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Undergraduate research experiences for STEM students: Successes, challenges, and opportunities. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24622
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). The science of effective mentorship in STEMM. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25568
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). Imagining the future of undergraduate STEM education: Proceedings of a virtual symposium. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26314
Næss, H. E. (2026). Diversity and inclusion management in sport organizations: An integrative literature review. Managing Sport and Leisure, 31(1), 77–102.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2023.2213707
OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 results (Volume III): Creative minds, creative schools. OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/765ee8c2-en
Oliveras-Ortiz, Y. (2023). Facilities beyond physical spaces: A case for the intentional design and use of learning space. Journal of School Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/10526846231171858
Paniagua, A., & Istance, D. (2018). Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085374-en
Pérez, R. A. (2018). Estrategar: Vivir la estrategia. Editorial UNLZ, Universidad Nacional de Lomas de Zamora.
Simpson, A., & Bouhafa, Y. (2020). Youths’ and adults’ identity in STEM: A systematic literature review. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3(2), 167–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00034-y
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications.
Stelter, R.L., Kupersmidt, J.B. and Stump, K.N. (2021), Establishing effective STEM mentoring relationships through mentor training. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 1483: 224-243.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14470
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
Tseng, J. J., Chai, C. S., Tan, L., & Park, M. (2022). A critical review of research on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in language teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 948-971.
UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
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
Zhai, Y., Tripp, J., & Liu, X. (2024). Science teacher identity research: A scoping literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00481-8
Derechos de autor 2026 Germán Collazos Guzmán , Mateo Collazos Roa
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0.
.png)
.png)
1.png)
