Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 13, Article number: 1076 (2026)
2471
Metrics details
Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) encompass a complex web of wisdom, practices, and worldviews developed through the deep-rooted relationships of the Indigenous communities with their environment, culture, and society. The growing recognition of IKS’s role in enhancing sustainability and community resilience has motivated efforts to incorporate IKS into Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) curricula. This study utilized a systematic literature review to examine the integration of IKS into STEM education between 2019 and 2024. Utilizing the PRISMA method, a comprehensive search was conducted across Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases. Of the 548 initially identified articles, 19 met the final inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed that integrating IKS into STEM education significantly enhanced students’ mastery of scientific concepts, creative thinking skills, and environmental awareness, while simultaneously fostering cultural identity, inclusivity, and social justice. Despite these benefits, several challenges were identified, including epistemological conflicts, lack of formal guidelines, limited teacher preparedness, resource constraints, and difficulties in authentic community engagement. To address these issues, strategies, such as co-developing an inclusive curriculum with Indigenous communities, emphasizing continuous professional development for teachers and implementing culturally responsive assessment methods were recommended. The findings underscore that integrating IKS into STEM is a transformative approach that enriches educational paradigms and promotes holistic student development. Ultimately, this review highlights the need for sustained policy support, long-term community partnerships, and systemic reforms for effective and sustainable integration of IKS in STEM education.
Indigenous peoples represent a diverse array of communities with rich cultural heritages, languages, and traditions that span across continents. Their worldviews are deeply rooted in relationships with land and ecosystems; however, colonial histories and ongoing discrimination have significantly undermined their social, educational, and environmental outcomes (Mante et al., 2019; Barnes et al., 2022). In this context, the integration of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) is crucial for ecosystem management (Alexiades et al., 2021; Acharibasam, 2022). Aligning education with Indigenous perspectives fosters identity and enhances academic success (Jin, 2021; Anthony-Stevens et al., 2020). Furthermore, decolonizing education through collaborative approaches respects Indigenous wisdom, improving curricular relevance and promoting inclusive knowledge for all learners (Jacob et al., 2015).
Integrating IKS into science education is pivotal for decolonizing paradigms and validating local and peasant knowledge. Sunzuma et al. (2025) emphasized that contextualizing STEM with IKS validates Indigenous lived experiences and reflects postcolonial realities. Recent global collaborations have advanced meaningful frameworks for IKS recognition, pushing beyond tokenism in higher education (Keane et al., 2023). Consequently, the field of Intercultural Science Education (ISE) has witnessed considerable growth, championing a more holistic and equitable approach to learning that bridges scientific inquiry with Indigenous perspectives, ultimately reshaping educational practices to be more reflective of diverse cultural realities (Thompson, 2021).
IKS comprises a complex web of wisdom, practices, and worldviews developed by Indigenous peoples over millennia, shaped by their unique relationships to environment, culture, and community, encompassing not only TEK but also oral histories, spiritual beliefs, and social structures essential to identity and governance. IKS, including traditional and local ecological knowledge (TLEK), plays a central role in environmental monitoring, especially in Arctic and Subarctic regions, underscoring its importance in environmental management and policy-making (Kouril et al., 2016; Thompson et al., 2020). Indigenous peoples’ holistic view interlinks cultural practices with biodiversity management, enhancing sustainability and ecological resilience (Skroblin et al., 2022; Bingham et al., 2021). Integrating Indigenous knowledge with Western science through “Two-Eyed Seeing” promotes inclusive environmental governance and improved decision-making that empowers Indigenous communities while enriching management practices (Reid et al., 2021; Bingham et al., 2021). Recognizing the Indigenous’ lived experiences and the interconnectedness allows policymakers, researchers, and practitioners to design more effective and equitable sustainability strategies.
Integrating IKS into Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education offers a transformative opportunity to enhance outcomes and promote cultural inclusivity, responding to calls for epistemological diversification where Western scientific narratives dominate (Nwokocha & Legg-Jack, 2024; Govander & Stott, 2024). Understanding IKS’s historical roots and significance is key, as it enriches global scientific knowledge through unique, lived perspectives (Nwokocha & Legg-Jack, 2024; Jin, 2021). Challenges include disparities in knowledge recognition and biases privileging Western methods (Jin, 2021), which require culturally sensitive models like the M-Know framework (Nwokocha & Legg-Jack, 2024). Teaching strategies should embrace collaboration and holistic learning rooted in IKS, harmonized with Western approaches via sociocultural theory (Photo & McKnight, 2024; Nkopodi et al., 2024), while emphasizing relevance to global challenges (Nwokocha & Legg-Jack, 2024). Enhancing teacher education through targeted professional development is critical to foster cultural responsiveness and integrate IKS competently (Photo & McKnight, 2024; Jull et al., 2017; Castagno & Brayboy, 2008). Culturally sustaining pedagogy improves student well-being and engagement, as shown in models like M-Know in South Africa (Nkopodi et al., 2024; Nwokocha & Legg-Jack, 2024). Bridging TEK with Western science enhances environmental education and sustainability efforts (Bohensky & Maru, 2011). Community-based participatory research ensures authentic integration and respects Indigenous ownership (Jull et al., 2017). Aligning IKS with SDGs advances educational equity and social justice (Mensah & Jackson, 2018). Additionally, ICT can support dynamic, interactive ways to integrate IKS into STEM, increasing visibility and breaking barriers between traditional and modern knowledge (Nkopodi et al., 2024).
The integration of IKS into STEM education is not merely an additive process but a transformative journey that redefines educational paradigms. Through thoughtful pedagogy, professional development, and community engagement, STEM education can emerge as a more equitable and representative field that honors the contributions of Indigenous peoples while equipping all students with the holistic understanding necessary to navigate complex global challenges. This study aims to address the following research questions to recognize the emerging trends and situations within the integration of IKS in STEM education over the past six years.
RQ1: What is the context of the reviewed studies?
RQ2: What are the learning theories or frameworks discussed in the reviewed studies?
RQ3: What key findings have been identified from the reviewed studies regarding the
integration of IKS into STEM education?
RQ4: What are the key challenges encountered in integrating IKS into STEM education?
RQ5: What are the strategies proposed in the reviewed studies to effectively address these challenges?
This section discusses the method for retrieving articles related to the integration of IKS in STEM education. The study employed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework to guide the systematic review process. The study conducted data abstraction and analysis using resources, namely Scopus and Web of Science, before conducting processes, which involved defining eligibility and exclusion criteria and the steps of a review: identification, screening, and eligibility.
The PRISMA Statement has served as the review’s compass in the subject of environmental management. Sierra-Correa and Cantera Kintz (2015) stated three distinct advantages of PRISMA: (i) it examines a large database of scientific literature within a defined time; (ii) it identifies inclusion and exclusion criteria; and (iii) it defines clear research questions that permit systematic research. In the current study, the use of the PRISMA Statement enabled a thorough search of phrases and coded information on the Indigenous peoples to provide future environmental management evaluations.
There were three main phases involved in this systematic literature review (SLR): the identification phase, the screening phase, and the eligibility phase.
Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and ScienceDirect have advanced searching capabilities that are comprehensive, reliable, and multidisciplinary.
WoS is a comprehensive database by Clarivate Analytics, spanning over a century and ranked by citations, papers, and citations per paper. It includes over 33,000 journals across 256 fields, such as social concerns, development, integrative social sciences, and environmental studies. The second database used was Scopus, covering over 22,800 journals from 5000 publishers. It is one of the largest abstract and citation databases, encompassing fields like social sciences, biology, agriculture, and environmental studies. The third was ScienceDirect, a full-text database by Elsevier with access to over 18 million publications, including 4000+ journals and 30,000 books across scientific and technical disciplines.
Identification is the process of identifying variants of the study’s primary keywords, related phrases, or synonyms. Its objective is to provide a database with an additional means of locating related papers for evaluation. The researchers expanded the existing terms and generated a complete search string by utilizing field code functions, wildcards, truncation, phrase searching, and Boolean operators within the databases. The search string was narrowed into keywords as follows: (“STEM education” OR “STEM learning” OR “science education”) AND (“Indigenous knowledge” OR “Aboriginal knowledge” OR “Native knowledge” OR “First Nation knowledge”). After determining all relevant terms, search strings for Scopus, Web of Science and ScienceDirect databases were constructed in July 2025 (see Table 1). In the first stage of the systematic review procedure, 548 articles were found.
Eliminating duplicate papers was the first step in the screening process. A total of 548 publications were assessed for inclusion in the current study using data gathered from primary and secondary databases. To maintain and reduce bias when searching databases for papers during the screening process, the same inclusion criteria were used in each database. In the current study, the screening process was carried out manually on databases that lacked a sorting feature.
Researchers have studied the concepts of STEM education and indigenous knowledge for decades. Nevertheless, searches of selected databases revealed that the number of studies on indigenous knowledge in STEM education increased considerably since 2019. This directed the inclusion criteria for the current study, which were threefold (refer to Table 2). The criteria were papers published (i) between 2019 and 2024, (ii) peer-reviewed, and (iii) in English. This phase resulted in 323 articles being removed from the current study since they did not match the inclusion criteria. As a result, 225 papers were ready for the eligibility procedure.
The final phase involved eligibility. This stage verifies that all selected articles meet all inclusion requirements. In this phase, researchers must review paper titles and abstracts. Only papers that have unclear titles and abstracts will be considered for further review.
This phase yielded 19 papers, and 206 were discarded. The discarded papers were primarily attributed to their journal type, the presence of duplicated information across databases, objectives that did not focus on students, lack of open access, and publication in a non-English language, as shown in Fig. 1, which describes the flow of publications through different stages of the systematic literature review. To ensure the scientific rigor of the review, the papers were subjected to a quality assessment to confirm that they contained detailed methodology, empirical data, and a section on key findings (Alamgir et al., 2022). Table 2 lists the elements of quality appraisal used to evaluate the strength of the selected articles.
This figure illustrates the stepwise process of article selection according to the PRISMA framework. It shows the number of records identified, screened, excluded, and finally included in the review.
This section discusses 19 papers on theories and frameworks, context, challenges, and solutions for integrating IKS into STEM education published between 2019 and 2024. Data from the reviewed publications were analyzed and synthesized using appropriate statistical methods, selected based on data type. These techniques provided a comprehensive synthesis of the literature and insights into effective IKS integration in STEM education. The study’s research questions guided the findings, which examined the theoretical foundations, design, and challenges of integrating IKS into STEM education. These issues are summed up in Tables 3–8.
This section is divided into two parts. The first part describes, as shown in Table 3, the type of publication, country, year of publication, data collection method, and sample size. The second part in Table 6 summarizes the findings synthesized from the SLR studies.
The current study organized 19 papers according to their implementation countries. This geographic distribution of scientific contributions provides valuable insights into the research site. In general, the reviewed studies took place in seven different countries (refer to Fig. 2). According to Fig. 2, the United States of America and Africa emerged as the leading regions for studies on IKS integration in STEM education, each accounting for five of the total papers reviewed. Indonesia, Australia, and Canada followed this, each contributing three studies, respectively. Meanwhile, the Caribbean Islands and the Philippines each contributed a single study. These findings suggest that research on IKS integration in STEM education is concentrated in Africa and the United States of America, with emerging contributions from other regions. The geographic distribution highlights the worldwide relevance of indigenous knowledge in STEM education research and its capacity to improve learning outcomes and student engagement globally.
This figure presents the geographical spread of the reviewed studies.
In terms of the distribution of publications, one paper was published in 2019 and 2020. In 2021, the number of publications increased to the highest level of eight, but then it declined to two papers in 2022. However, the number of publications escalated to five articles in 2023 and reduced to two articles in 2024. Figure 3 presents the distribution of publications.
This figure shows the temporal trend of selected articles published between 2019 and 2024. The vertical axis represents the number of publications per year. Error bars indicate standard deviations where applicable.
Based on Fig. 4, scientific research on indigenous knowledge in STEM education was divided into two major categories: conceptual and empirical. There cannot be meaningful study findings until there is a concept that directs the gathering of data, or “evidence.” Likewise, there cannot be any meaningful study results without a concept. Unlike theory-based research, empirical research relies on actual experiments. A total of three articles (15%) were classified as conceptual research, while 17 papers (85%) were classified as empirical research.
This figure categorizes the reviewed studies according to their research type, including empirical research and conceptual research. Each bar represents the frequency of occurrence for a specific research type.
The distribution of SLR participants reflects the scale and focus of IKS integration in STEM education (see Table 4). Larger samples enhance the reliability and generalizability of findings, offering more precise insights. In contrast, smaller samples may reduce stability but allow for deeper, context-specific exploration. Three studies involved over 100 participants, suggesting focused investigations into specific settings. Meanwhile, 15 studies had fewer than 100 participants, offering diverse perspectives on interdisciplinary IKS-STEM integration. This variation highlights the need to consider sample size when assessing the reliability and applicability of research outcomes.
The diversity of research methodologies highlights different approaches to integrating IKS into STEM education. This review found that over half of the studies were qualitative (see Fig. 5), using methods, such as observations and interviews to explore IKS integration in depth. Three studies used quantitative methods, primarily through questionnaires, while only two employed mixed methods. This distribution underscores the need for varied research approaches to fully assess the effectiveness and impact of IKS integration in STEM education.
This figure summarises the types of data collection methods reported, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed method strategies. Bars indicate the number of studies using each method.
Following the synthesizing of previous literature reviews, this review identified significant theoretical frameworks related to indigenous knowledge in STEM education. Theoretical frameworks serve as the core pillars of academic study, especially in STEM education, because they address the numerous and changing difficulties that educators and students encounter. Theoretical frameworks serve as a blueprint for researchers and provide structured viewpoints and guiding principles for investigating complicated phenomena. They offer clarity and direction throughout the research process by defining the scope of the study, informing the problem statement, and establishing the significance of the research within the existing body of knowledge (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). In addition, these frameworks shed light on effective teaching approaches, the integration of cultural knowledge, and the promotion of inclusivity and sustainability in education. The lack of theoretical frameworks in practical studies contributes to ineffective measurement (Behl et al., 2022). The theories and frameworks are summarized in Table 5.
Table 5 reveals a comprehensive, nuanced landscape of theoretical foundations and frameworks that promote integrating IKS into STEM education. There were twenty frameworks supporting cultural identity, empowerment, sustainability, epistemological justice, and inclusive, transformative science education, forming an ethically grounded basis for reimagining science as an inclusive, pluralistic, and culturally affirming domain.
The Two-Eyed Seeing (TES) framework emphasizes ethical engagement that integrates Indigenous and Western scientific perspectives to foster sustainability, relationality, and social responsibility (Cirkony et al., 2023; Habash, 2024). Ethno-STEM and ethnoscience frameworks merge Indigenous knowledge with STEM content to enhance contextual relevance, creativity, and cultural responsiveness (Izzah et al., 2023; Sumarni et al., 2022). Place-based pedagogy grounds learning in local ecological and community contexts, strengthening environmental stewardship (Ward et al., 2023). Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy (CSP) affirms students’ cultural identities while engaging them in rigorous scientific inquiry, promoting inclusive and empowering experiences (Eitel et al., 2024), while Culturally Relevant Education (CRE) connects curricula to student lived experiences and supports critical reflection (Spencer et al., 2022). Critical theory and critical ontological theory challenge Western dominance and advocate for centering Indigenous epistemologies (Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; Opoku & James, 2021). Indigenous knowledge theories emphasize Indigenous ontologies and moral codes in educational designs. The Isumaqatigingniq approach embodies relational, collaborative ‘thinking together’ to integrate Inuit knowledge and Western science (Nweeia & Peeters, 2021). Eglash et al. (2020) highlighted the role of indigenous material agency in generative STEM centers, community agencies, and non-extractive, intergenerational learning. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory highlights social interaction and cultural mediation in learning (Photo & McKnight, 2024), aligning with community-based design research and participatory action research that value co-creation and community ownership (David-Chavez et al., 2020). Dialog between epistemologies fosters the integration of Indigenous and Western knowledge for contextually relevant, quality education (Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021), while frameworks for cultural relevance and sustainable development emphasize interdisciplinary, local knowledge in curricula (Oliveira et al., 2021).
Gumbo et al. (2021) demonstrated that merging African IKS with Western science greatly enhanced student learning outcomes and supports gender equity in science classrooms. Similarly, Izzah et al. (2023) showed that Ethno-STEM learning improved science concept mastery and creative thinking, though with limited changes in environmental attitudes. Barnes et al. (2022) highlighted the importance of community consultation, student leadership, and respectful engagement to increase retention and participation among Australian Indigenous students. Pejaner and Gutierrez (2023) emphasized integrating Indigenous knowledge to make science more inclusive and contextually relevant, despite barriers. David-Chavez et al. (2020) illustrated that while Indigenous knowledge enriches education and research, historical silencing persisted and required community action. Ward et al. (2023) showed that using totemic species in primary education enhances science understanding and creativity. Eitel et al. (2024) and Eglash et al. (2020) confirmed that culturally sustaining approaches help students form dual identities, fostering inclusivity and empowerment.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, integrating IKS with Western science increased contextual relevance and supports sustainability (Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021), while Meilinda et al. (2021) demonstrated how Indigenous water conservation knowledge contributes to sustainability. Sumarni et al. (2022) underscored local knowledge’s potential to increase science relevance and application. Photo and McKnight (2024) stressed the need for teacher training and guidelines to embed IKS effectively. De-Abreu et al. (2022) and Oliveira et al. (2021) showed that Indigenous perspectives enriched environmental education.
In addition, efforts like Cultural Relevance in Chemistry with the Iñupiaq Community and Isumaqatigingniq programs bridged local cultural contexts and scientific knowledge, fostering understanding (Spencer et al., 2022; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021). Cirkony et al. (2023) and Opoku and James (2021) advocated integrating Indigenous perspectives, emphasizing local languages, cultural heroes, and new tools, such as apps. Eitel et al. (2024) and Habash (2024) illustrated the potential to instil social responsibility, empower students as change agents, and prepare them for sustainability-focused careers.
Together, these studies highlight that integrating IKS supports cognitive growth, cultural identity, environmental consciousness, and social justice. It promotes a holistic science education that respects diverse knowledge systems, encourages intercultural engagement, and equips learners for sustainable futures. However, challenges, such as institutional resistance, limited teacher readiness, and historical exclusion, underline the need for inclusive policies, comprehensive teacher training, and supportive learning environments.
Table 7 shows the epistemological conflicts as one of the most consistently reported challenges (Gumbo et al., 2021; Izzah et al., 2023; Pejaner and Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer and Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Photo and McKnight, 2024; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; Nweeia and Peeters, 2021; Opoku and James, 2021; and Habash, 2024). The conflicts arose from fundamental differences between Western paradigms and Indigenous ways of knowing. The lack of formal guidelines was another barrier that hindered teachers’ planning and consistency, as reported in Izzah et al. (2023), Pejaner and Gutierrez (2023), David-Chavez et al. (2020), Ward et al. (2023), Eglash et al. (2020), Seehawer and Breidlid (2021), Sumarni et al. (2022), De-Abreu et al. (2022), Oliveira et al. (2021), Spencer et al. (2022), and Opoku and James (2021). Meanwhile, the challenge of teacher preparedness underlines the importance of ongoing professional development (Izzah et al., 2023; Pejaner and Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer and Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Photo and McKnight, 2024; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; and Opoku and James, 2021).
In addition, resource constraints were a challenge that included a lack of materials and logistical support (Izzah et al., 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer and Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; and Opoku and James, 2021). Community engagement challenges emphasized the need for Indigenous communities’ involvement as active partners to ensure authenticity and acceptance. Socio-cultural resistance, identified in many studies, involves skepticism, fears of cultural dilution, and negative perceptions. Evaluation challenges, noted in Sumarni et al. (2022), Nweeia and Peeters (2021), and Opoku and James (2021), reflect the lack of suitable assessment tools. Sustainability issues, discussed in David-Chavez et al. (2020), Ward et al. (2023), Eglash et al. (2020), Seehawer and Breidlid (2021), Sumarni et al. (2022), Nweeia and Peeters (2021), and Opoku and James (2021), highlighted the need for long-term support and community involvement. Overall, integrating IKS into science education requires addressing these epistemological, structural, pedagogical, and socio-cultural challenges holistically, with strategies like co-developing guidelines, enhancing teacher capacity, improving resources, and fostering strong community partnerships for effective and sustainable integration.
To overcome the diverse challenges identified in integrating IKS into STEM education, the reviewed articles propose several strategic approaches. To address epistemological conflicts, many studies advocated for epistemological dialogs and adopting frameworks that encourage the coexistence of Indigenous and Western knowledge systems, such as Two-Eyed Seeing (Cirkony et al., 2023; Habash, 2024). The lack of formal guidelines could be mitigated by co-developing inclusive curricula and policy frameworks in close collaboration with Indigenous communities to ensure that local perspectives are genuinely represented and institutionalized (Opoku & James, 2021; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021). To strengthen teacher preparedness, CPD programs focusing on cultural competence, community-based pedagogies, and practical immersion experiences within Indigenous contexts were crucial (Photo & McKnight, 2024). Addressing resource constraints required the creation and dissemination of culturally authentic teaching materials co-designed with community members, including localized teaching kits, storytelling resources, and context-based science modules (Sumarni et al., 2022; Eitel et al., 2024). Meanwhile, community engagement barriers emphasized fostering long-term trust-based partnerships through the early and sustained involvement of Indigenous representatives in planning and implementation processes (David-Chavez et al., 2020; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021).
To counter institutional and sociocultural resistance, several papers recommend implementing awareness and sensitization initiatives at school and policy levels, alongside formally recognizing and celebrating Indigenous contributions to science through exhibitions and community events (Barnes et al., 2022; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023). Regarding assessment challenges, alternative evaluation methods, such as narrative-based assessments, community-validated rubrics, and project-based learning assessments, were suggested to better align with Indigenous epistemologies (Habash, 2024). Finally, to ensure sustainability and continuity, papers highlighted the need for long-term funding mechanisms, capacity-building initiatives for community members, and the development of local leadership to champion and maintain educational innovations beyond initial project periods (Eitel et al., 2024; Oliveira et al., 2021).
In summary, the aforementioned strategies highlight a holistic, culturally responsive, and community-based approach, stressing the need for genuine partnerships and systemic support for effective IKS integration in STEM education.
The publication trend from 2019 to 2025 shows a dynamic shift. In 2019 and 2020, only one article was published each year, indicating early-stage interest that is likely attributable to limited awareness, funding, or preference for traditional topics. A significant rise occurred in 2021 with eight publications, the highest during the period, suggesting increased awareness influenced by global efforts to integrate local knowledge and support educational innovation. However, in 2022, publications dropped to three, possibly due to the COVID-19 pandemic and shifting priorities. Interest rebounded slightly in 2023 with four articles, followed by a slight dip to three in 2024, which may reflect a shift toward more in-depth research rather than a decline in interest. Despite fluctuations, the upward trend after 2020 highlights growing academic relevance. Continued support for focused, high-quality research is essential to strengthen contributions to this field.
The geographic distribution analysis reveals key insights into where research on IKS integration in STEM education has occurred. Most studies came from the United States of America and Africa, reflecting their strong emphasis on multicultural, inclusive education and localized application of indigenous knowledge. Indonesia, Australia, and Canada each produced three studies, showing growing awareness in culturally diverse nations with significant indigenous populations. In contrast, the Caribbean Islands and the Philippines had only one study each, indicating limited research and a need for further exploration. In general, the trend points to a growing interest in IKS integration as a means of rendering STEM education more culturally relevant on a global scale. As such, research expansion in underrepresented regions is essential for a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of this field.
Research on Indigenous Knowledge in STEM education can be grouped into conceptual and empirical studies. Empirical work, involving data collection through experiments, observations, or case studies, dominated this review with 17 papers (85%). This focus reflects the field’s commitment to testing concepts in real-world contexts and generating evidence-based practices. In contrast, only three studies (15%) were conceptual, which typically develop ideas, frameworks, and theoretical perspectives to guide future research. Although limited, such studies are vital for framing questions and informing data collection, indicating a need for stronger theoretical development. Overall, the distribution shows an emphasis on practical application while acknowledging the importance of conceptual foundations.
The sample size distribution in this review offers insight into the scale and depth of IKS integration research in STEM education. Three studies involved over 100 participants, enhancing the reliability and generalizability of findings. Larger samples improve statistical power and enable stronger conclusions about IKS effectiveness. In contrast, 14 studies had fewer than 100 participants. Although less generalizable, smaller samples allow for deeper, context-specific insights into local applications of IKS. This variation highlights the importance of context in interpreting results—larger samples support broader relevance, while smaller ones offer rich, detailed perspectives. Nevertheless, both are deemed vital for advancing the theory and practice of IKS integration research in STEM education.
The theoretical frameworks and foundations highlight a powerful emerging discourse on integrating IKS into science and STEM education. Gumbo et al. (2021) and Izzah et al. (2023) emphasized that approaches like Ethno-STEM and Ethnophysics within Science, Technology, and Society (STS) frameworks effectively bridge cultural contexts and deepen students’ conceptual understanding, fostering creativity and contextual relevance through authentic learning experiences rooted in cultural realities. Further, Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy (CSP) and CRE, as advocated by Eitel et al. (2024), Spencer et al. (2022), and Barnes et al. (2022), stressed preserving cultural identity while enhancing scientific literacy by positioning Indigenous perspectives as foundational and empowering students as co-constructors of knowledge. Habash (2024) supported the Two-Eyed Seeing (TES) framework, emphasizing ethical, relational integration of Indigenous and Western knowledge systems with mutual respect and social responsibility. Pejaner and Gutierrez (2023) and Opoku and James (2021) applied critical theory and critical ontological theory to challenge Western epistemological dominance and called for decolonizing and indigenizing curricula. David-Chavez et al. (2020) reinforced this through Indigenous Research Methodologies and Participatory Action Research (PAR), highlighting community-driven, culturally grounded knowledge creation. Ward et al. (2023) and Meilinda et al. (2021) showed how Indigenous ecological knowledge supports sustainable practices and fosters moral and ecological consciousness. The collective emphasis on epistemological pluralism, relationality, and cultural integrity reflects a paradigm shift away from assimilationist models. Seehawer and Breidlid (2021) and Nweeia and Peeters (2021) advocated for epistemological dialog and relational, non-extractive approaches like Isumaqatigingniq to empower students. This synthesis reveals a shared commitment to making science and STEM education inclusive, culturally affirming, and ecologically responsive, urging policymakers, curriculum developers, and educators to promote epistemic justice, cultural sustainability, and community engagement.
The findings from the reviewed studies show that integrating IKS into science education greatly enhances students’ mastery of scientific concepts, creative thinking, inclusivity, and gender equity (Gumbo et al., 2021; Izzah et al., 2023). Culturally sustaining pedagogies and community engagement help Indigenous students develop as both scientists and cultural custodians, supporting curriculum decolonization and social justice (Barnes et al., 2022; Eitel et al., 2024). However, challenges like historical silencing, institutional resistance, lack of teacher preparation, resource constraints, and difficulties in community engagement require strong policy support and teacher training (Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Mafongoya et al., 2021; Eitel et al., 2024; Sumarni et al., 2022). Using local ecological knowledge fosters environmental stewardship and aligns with global sustainability frameworks (Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022). Innovative frameworks like “Two-Eyed Seeing” and decolonizing pedagogies promote holistic and ethical science education through Indigenous languages, cultural heroes, and technology (Cirkony et al., 2023; Habash, 2024; Opoku & James, 2021). While IKS enriches academic and social outcomes and supports cultural revitalization and sustainability, systemic reforms in curriculum, teacher training, resources, policy, and community partnerships are essential (Gumbo et al., 2021; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Opoku & James, 2021). Strategies include epistemological dialog, co-developed curricula, cultural competence training, authentic teaching materials, trust-based community relationships, awareness campaigns, alternative assessments, and long-term funding (Photo & McKnight, 2024; Barnes et al., 2022; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; Eitel et al., 2024; Oliveira et al., 2021). Scholars in ISE have long argued that integration requires more than just content alignment; it requires ‘epistemological bridges.’ Research findings support ISE models that advocate for active intercultural dialog in the classroom, where teachers act not only as instructors of Western science but as cultural brokers who navigate the boundaries between students’ local worldviews and scientific concepts.
The widespread issue of epistemological conflicts underscores the fundamental differences between Western scientific paradigms and Indigenous worldviews (Gumbo et al., 2021; Izzah et al., 2023; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Photo & McKnight, 2024; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021; Opoku & James, 2021; Habash, 2024). Addressing these tensions requires culturally responsive approaches that foster open dialog and mutual respect between different knowledge systems. However, the lack of formal guidelines suggests an urgent need for the development of inclusive policies and clear curricular frameworks to support teachers in planning and delivering IKS-integrated lessons systematically (Izzah et al., 2023; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; Opoku & James, 2021). In this context, CPD and training are essential to equip educators with the necessary cultural competence and pedagogical skills (Izzah et al., 2023; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Photo & McKnight, 2024; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; Opoku & James, 2021). However, scholarship in ISE suggests that general cultural competence is insufficient; teachers must be trained as ‘intercultural mediators’ capable of building ‘epistemological bridges’ in the classroom (Molina-Andrade & Mojica, 2013). Adopting such ISE frameworks offers a concrete model for the systemic reform of STEM teacher education, ensuring that educators are not just delivering content but actively navigating the diverse epistemic identities of their students (Valladares, 2021).
Resource constraints and socio-cultural resistance further highlight the importance of actively involving local communities in curriculum development and implementation (Izzah et al., 2023; David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Meilinda et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; De-Abreu et al., 2022; Oliveira et al., 2021; Spencer et al., 2022; Opoku & James, 2021). Strengthening community engagement ensures relevance and authentic educational content while fostering a sense of ownership and empowerment among Indigenous stakeholders (Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021). The challenges related to evaluation indicate that current assessment tools may not adequately capture learning outcomes grounded in local values and contexts (Sumarni et al., 2022; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021; Opoku & James, 2021). Therefore, there is a need to design more context-sensitive and holistic evaluation instruments that align with Indigenous perspectives. Lastly, the issue of sustainability highlights the necessity for long-term policy support, continuous resource provision, and strong community commitment to ensure that IKS integration efforts are sustained and impactful over time (David-Chavez et al., 2020; Ward et al., 2023; Eglash et al., 2020; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021; Opoku & James, 2021).
The successful integration of IKS into science education requires collaborative, multifaceted strategies that respect cultural uniqueness and aim to create meaningful and lasting educational experiences for future generations. Hence, strategies for integrating IKS into STEM education require significant systemic and cultural changes, instead of mere curriculum adjustments. Building respectful epistemological dialogs and developing inclusive curricula are essential to bridging knowledge systems (Cirkony et al., 2023; Habash, 2024; Opoku & James, 2021; Seehawer & Breidlid, 2021). Strengthening teacher capacity and creating culturally relevant resources further support this integration (Photo & McKnight, 2024; Mafongoya et al., 2021; Sumarni et al., 2022; Eitel et al., 2024). Involving Indigenous communities from the start fosters trust and ensures authenticity (David-Chavez et al., 2020; Nweeia & Peeters, 2021). Addressing resistance through awareness initiatives promotes wider acceptance (Barnes et al., 2022; Pejaner & Gutierrez, 2023). Culturally sensitive assessment methods help capture diverse learning outcomes more effectively (Habash, 2024). Finally, ensuring sustainability through long-term funding and local leadership is critical to maintaining progress (Eitel et al., 2024; Oliveira et al., 2021). These approaches emphasize that successful IKS integration must be holistic, community-driven, and supported by strong policy and structural commitments.
The integration of IKS into STEM education represents a transformative shift toward more equitable and culturally responsive learning. Achieving this integration necessitates an ISE framework that legitimizes Indigenous, local, and peasant epistemologies alongside Western scientific traditions. By fostering dialog between knowledge systems, this approach strengthens students’ cultural identity and sense of belonging, while also enriching scientific understanding. Nevertheless, its implementation continues to face challenges, including epistemological tensions, limited institutional support, and insufficient teacher preparedness for intercultural pedagogy.
A systemic transition toward sustained “dialog between epistemologies” is essential. Policymakers should prioritize the co-development of curricula in partnership with Indigenous and local communities to ensure epistemic equity and contextual relevance. Teacher education programs must place greater emphasis on developing competencies in intercultural dialog, reflexivity, and decolonial pedagogies. Furthermore, assessment practices should be re-envisioned to move beyond standardized metrics by incorporating narrative-based, participatory, and community-validated evaluation frameworks capable of capturing holistic and culturally grounded learning outcomes.
This review is limited by its focus on English-language publications published between 2019 and 2024, which constrains its global representativeness. Notably, this restriction excludes substantial bodies of scholarship from Latin America that contribute critical insights into ISE and Peasant Knowledge Systems. Future reviews should adopt multilingual inclusion strategies, particularly incorporating Spanish and Portuguese literature to ensure broader epistemic representation and to avoid perpetuating neo-colonial biases in academic knowledge production.
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are publicly available at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/O0PB6G.
Acharibasam J (2022) Decolonizing climate change education: evidence from an empirical study in ghana. J Educ Pract https://doi.org/10.7176/jep/13-32-06
Alamgir AKM, Nudel S, Abojedi A (2022) A practice-based methodology on conducting a collaborative scoping review with PRISMA-ScR model for the separated refugee youth project. J Sci Res Rep 28:23–33. https://doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2022/v28i230498
Article Google Scholar
Alexiades AV, Haeffner MA, Reano D, Janis M, Black J, Sonoda K, Howard M, Fiander C, Buck M (2021) Traditional ecological knowledge and inclusive pedagogy increase retention and success outcomes of STEM students. Bull Ecol Soc Am 102:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1924
Article Google Scholar
Anthony-Stevens, V, Jones J, Begay, V (2020) Regenerating teacher education programs with indigenous knowledge in Idaho. Northwest J Teach Educ 15:3 https://doi.org/10.15760/nwjte.2020.15.3.3
Barnes EC, Jamie IM, Vemulpad SR, Yaegl Community Elders, Breckenridge D, Froud AE, Harrington DG, Packer JM, Prenzler PD, Bedgood DR, Jamie JF (2022) National Indigenous Science Education Program (NISEP): outreach strategies that facilitate inclusion. J Chem Educ 99:245–251. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00393
Article CAS Google Scholar
Behl A, Jayawardena N, Pereira V, Islam N, Giudice MD, Choudrie J (2022) Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 176:121445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445
Bingham JA, Milne S, Murray G, Dorward T (2021) Knowledge pluralism in first nations’ salmon management. Front Mar Sci 8:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.671112
Article Google Scholar
Bohensky EL, Maru Y (2011) Synthesis, part of a special feature on integrating indigenous ecologicalknowledge and science in natural resource management: perspectives from Australia indigenousknowledge, science, and resilience: what have we learned from a decade of international. Ecol Soc 16:6. https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss4/art6/
Castagno AE, Brayboy BMJ (2008) Culturally responsive schooling for Indigenous youth: A review of the literature. Review educ res 78:941–993
Article Google Scholar
Cirkony C, Kenny J, Zandvliet D (2023) A two-eyed seeing teaching and learning framework for science education. Can J Sci Math Technol Educ 23:340–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-023-00276-z
Article Google Scholar
David-Chavez DM, Valdez S, Estevez JB, Meléndez Martínez C, Garcia AA, Josephs K, Troncoso A (2020) Community-based (rooted) research for regeneration: understanding benefits, barriers, and resources for Indigenous education and research. AlterNative 16:220–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180120952896
Article Google Scholar
De-Abreu S, Vogt KA, Schreier A, Fawcett P, Marchand ME, Vogt DJ, Tulee M, George W, Martin L, Matsumoto K (2022) Teaching holistic environmental thought: a classroom approach. Think Skills Creativity 46: 101141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101141
Article Google Scholar
Eglash R, Lachney M, Babbitt W, Bennett A, Reinhardt M, Davis J (2020) Decolonizing education with Anishinaabe arcs: generative STEM as a path to indigenous futurity. Educ Technol Res Dev 68:1569–1593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09728-6
Article Google Scholar
Eitel KB, Wheeler A, Seven K, Pinkham J, Cavazos Cohn T, Uh C, White Temple E, Davis M, McFarland J, Eitel J, Carter M, Dixon R, Vierling L (2024) Culturally sustaining pedagogy in an outdoor environmental science education program to support high school students’ identities as Indigenous people and scientists. J Geosci Educ 72:119–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2023.2228170
Article Google Scholar
Govender N, Stott A (2024) Special issue of the african journal of research in mathematics, science and technology education (ajrmste): the role of iks in stem education for addressing the sustainable development goals African J Res Mathematics Sci Technol Educ 28:315–318
Article Google Scholar
Grant C, Osanloo A (2014) Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house”. Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice and Research, 4(2)
Gumbo MT, Nnadi FO, Anamezie RC (2021) Amalgamating western science and African indigenous knowledge systems in the measurement of gravitational acceleration. J Balt Sci Educ 20:729–739. https://doi.org/10.33225/JBSE/21.20.729
Article Google Scholar
Habash R (2024) Two-eyed seeing: an ethical space of engagement to shape engineering and computing education for sustainable development. Sustain Horiz 12: 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.horiz.2024.100118
Article Google Scholar
Izzah SN, Sudarmin, Wiyanto, Wardani S (2023) Analysis of science concept mastery, creative thinking skills, and environmental attitudes after ethno-STEM learning implementation. Int J Instr 16:777–796. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16342a
Article Google Scholar
Jacob WJ, Cheng SY, Porter, MK (2015) Global review of Indigenous education: issues of identity, culture, and language. In W. J. Jacob, S. Y. Cheng, & M. K. Porter (Eds.), Indigenous Education: Language, Culture and Identity (pp. 1–35) Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9355-1
Jin, Q (2021) Supporting Indigenous students in science and STEM education: a systematic review. Educ Sci 11: 555. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090555
Jull J, Giles A, Graham I (2017) Community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation: advancing the co-creation of knowledge. Implementation Science, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0696-3
Keane M, Raciti M, Westhuizen G, Motala S, Stanton S, Gilbey K, Msimango S (2023) Indigenous knowledge Systems in South Africa and Australia: transforming doctoral education. Curric Perspect 43:83–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-023-00183-1
Article Google Scholar
Kouril D, Furgal C, Whillans T. (2016) Trends and key elements in community-based monitoring: a systematic review of the literature with an emphasis on Arctic and Subarctic regions. Environmental Reviews 24:151–163
Article Google Scholar
Mafongoya O, Mafongoya PL, Mudhara M (2021) Using indigenous knowledge systems in seasonal prediction and adapting to climate change impacts in Bikita District in Zimbabwe. Orient Anthrop 21:195–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972558X21997662
Article Google Scholar
Mante A, Cicek J, Friesen M, Kavanagh L (2019) Assessing the impact of integrating indigenous knowledges and perspectives in engineering curricula on students’ learning: the development of a classroom case study. In Proc. Canadian Engineering Education Association (Ceea). https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi0.13881
Meilinda, Nazip K, Riyanto (2021) Indigenous knowledge of Besemah-Semende’s people on water conservation resources. Int J Environ Sci Dev 12:87–94.https://doi.org/10.18178/ijesd.2021.12.3.1323
Mensah FM, Jackson I (2018) Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers college record 120:1–38
Article Google Scholar
Molina-Andrade A, Mojica L (2013) Teaching as a bridge between scientific knowledge at school and traditional ecological knowledge. Magis 6:37
Google Scholar
Nkopodi N, Jakovljevic M, Photo P (2024) Criteria for enhancing student wellbeing in STEM classrooms: ICT and indigenous knowledge in South African higher education. Discover Education, 3(1), 152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00251-2
Nweeia MT, Peeters P (2021) Isumaqatigingniq: building a transformational science education model to engage the next generation of Inuit and western scientific investigators. Arctic 74:15–22. https://doi.org/10.14430/ARCTIC73779
Article Google Scholar
Nwokocha G, Legg-Jack D (2024) Reimagining stem education in south africa: leveraging indigenous knowledge systems through the m-know model for curriculum enhancement. Int J Soc Sci Res Rev 7:173–189
Article Google Scholar
Oliveira J, Neves L, Lanceros-Mendez, S (2021) Kit “energy, environment and sustainability”: an educational strategy for a sustainable future. a case study for Guinea-Bissau. Educ Sci 11:787 https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11120787
Opoku MJ, James A (2021) Pedagogical model for decolonising, indigenising and transforming science education curricula: a case of South Africa. J Balt Sci Educ 20:93–107. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.93
Article Google Scholar
Pejaner KJB, Gutierrez, SB (2023) Challenging the Hegemony of western science via culturally relevant science teaching. Asten J Teach Educ 7 https://doi.org/10.56278/asten.v7i.2179
Photo P, McKnight, M (2024) Investigating indigenous knowledge awareness among South African science teachers for developing a guideline. Curric Perspect 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-023-00224-9
Reid AJ, Eckert LE, Lane JF, Young N, Hinch SG, Darimont CT, Cooke SJ, Ban NC, Marshall A (2021) “Two-eyed seeing”: an indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management. Fish Fisheries 22:243–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12516
Article Google Scholar
Seehawer M, Breidlid A (2021) Dialogue between epistemologies as quality education. Integrating knowledges in Sub-Saharan African classrooms to foster sustainability learning and contextually relevant education. Soc Sci Humanit Open 4: 100200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100200
Article Google Scholar
Sierra-Correa, Cristina P, Kintz C, Ricardo J (2015) Ecosystem-based adaptation for improving coastal planning for sea-level rise: A systematic review for mangrove coasts. Marine Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.09.013
Skroblin A, Carboon T, Bidu G, Taylor M, Bidu N, Taylor W, Taylor K, Miller M, Robinson L, Williams C, Chapman N, Marney M, Marney C, Biljabu J, Biljabu L, Jeffries P, Samson H, Charles P, Game ET, Wintle B (2022) Developing a two-way learning monitoring program for Mankarr (Greater Bilby) in the Western Desert, Western Australia. Ecol Manag Restor 23:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12543
Article Google Scholar
Spencer JL, Maxwell DN, Erickson KRS, Wall D, Nicholas-Figueroa L, Shultz GV (2022) Cultural relevance in chemistry education: snow chemistry and the Iñupiaq Community. J Chem Educ 99:363–372. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00480
Article CAS Google Scholar
Sumarni W, Sudarmin S, Sumarti SS, Kadarwati, S (2022) Indigenous knowledge of Indonesian traditional medicines in science teaching and learning using a science–technology–engineering–mathematics (STEM) approach. Cult Stud Sci Educ 17, Springer, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10067-3
Sunzuma G, Zezekwa N, Mudzamiri E, Chikuvadze, P (2025) Indigenous knowledge systems integration into STEM education: a Zimbabwean perspective. https://doi.org/10.70593/978-93-49910-68-3
Thompson KL, Lantz TC, Ban NC (2020) A review of indigenous knowledge and participation in environmental monitoring. Ecol Soc 25:1–27. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11503-250210
Article CAS Google Scholar
Thompson S (2021) The need and desire for inclusive universities: a perspective from development studies. Soc Incl 9:27–31. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4096
Article Google Scholar
Valladares L (2021) Scientific literacy and social transformation: critical perspectives about science participation and emancipation. Sci Educ 30:557–587
Article Google Scholar
Ward NM, Garrard G, Gregg EA, May B, Wandin D, Harrison M, Pascoe M, McConachie F, Moggridge B, Kusmanoff A, Bekessy SA (2023) Totemic species” can be an effective lens for engaging students with Indigenous knowledge and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Sci Pract 5:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12904
Article Google Scholar
Download references
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Department Curriculum and Instructional Technology of Faculty Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Wan Noraini Wan Razab & Norlidah Alias
Department of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Mohd Razip Bajuri
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
Wan Noraini Wan Razab: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, writing—original draft. Norlidah Alias: supervision, resources, project administration, review & editing. Mohd Razip Bajuri: investigation, validation.
Correspondence to Norlidah Alias.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical statement was not required as the study did not involve human participants.
None of the authors conducted studies involving human participants in this article.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Wan Razab, W.N., Alias, N. & Bajuri, M.R. A systematic literature review on the integration of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) into STEM education. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 13, 1076 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07227-7
Download citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07227-7
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (Humanit Soc Sci Commun)
ISSN 2662-9992 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited