Investigating In-service Chemistry Teachers’ Conceptions about Transdisciplinary Practice in the Era of Curriculum Reform

Investigating In-service Chemistry Teachers’ Conceptions about Transdisciplinary Practice in the Era of Curriculum Reform | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Investigating In-service Chemistry Teachers’ Conceptions about Transdisciplinary Practice in the Era of Curriculum Reform Huinan Liu, Bo Chen, Jing Kang, Hualing Yang This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The curriculum reform of science education is shifting towards transdisciplinary approaches. This study aimed to investigate how chemistry teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice in the era of curriculum reform. The theoretical framework included essential characteristics, discipline relations, values, influencing factors of transdisciplinary practice. Participants consisted of 241 Chinese in-service chemistry teachers. A questionnaire survey and an in-depth interview were conducted to explore their conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the reasons. The findings indicated that they tended to understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective, but not completely up to the transdisciplinary level; when representing the relations between various disciplines, they agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving, stressed the role of chemistry, but less valued engineering; they incomprehensively described the values of transdisciplinary practice, mainly focusing on its contributions to student development; they believed transdisciplinary practice implementation can be effectively promoted by positive student factors, but it is faced with great external challenges. The reasons for their conceptions stemmed from relevant documents, own subject background, views on educational goals, decoupling from exam evaluation, etc. These results suggest that more measures need to be taken to improve teachers’ conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Social science/Education Biological sciences/Psychology Social science/Psychology Transdisciplinary practice In-service chemistry teachers STEM education Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Introduction It is a current trend that the curriculum reform of science education is shifting from single-disciplinary towards transdisciplinary approaches, to better meet real-world expectations (Daneshpour & Kwegyir-Aful, 2022). Transdisciplinary education helps foster effective learning of learners and fulfill sustainable development goals (Flavian, 2024). Transdisciplinary talents play a crucial role in technological development and era change, as they can address a variety of global challenges such as climate change, food security, energy crisis, labor shortage, and aging. As a model of transdisciplinary education, integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education has been formulated by many countries as a crucial educational strategy. Taking the United States of America (USA) as an example, National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. STEM education System focused on the connection of STEM education between K-12 and undergraduate stages, and emphasized the importance of cultivating STEM teachers (NSB, 2007); Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for STEM education advocated that the federal government, society, and schools need to make joint efforts to jointly build the United States into the “North Star” of the global STEM field (The White House, 2018). Influenced by international educational trends, China’s science curriculum reform also emphasized transdisciplinary education. For instance, Chemistry Curriculum Standards of Compulsory Education (the 2022 version) first proposed the learning theme of “transdisciplinary practice” (called “kua xue ke shi jian” in Chinese), which advocates that in activities of transdisciplinary practice, students can integrate knowledge of chemistry, technology, engineering and other subjects, and form ideas and methods for transdisciplinary problem solutions, to cope with potential crises and uncertain challenges (MoE, 2022). Furthermore, curriculum standards have clearly stated that the number of teaching hours for transdisciplinary practice should account for more than 10% of the total hours, and provide ten teaching activities of transdisciplinary practice (e.g., test water quality and make water purifiers, explore the impact of soil acidity and alkalinity on plant growth, comprehensively utilize marine resources and produce salt). Thus, it can be seen that Chinese chemistry curriculum standards has clearly required enacting the educational idea of transdisciplinary practice in middle schools. As we know, teachers play a critical role in education, whose beliefs can influence the implementation of curriculum reform, including acquiring pedagogical content, designing teaching activities, and conducting teaching practice (Sun & Zhang, 2024). Undoubtedly, teachers’ conceptions of transdisciplinary practice make a great difference to enact it. Especially in China, since teachers are accustomed to traditional subject-based teaching, they are likely to encounter great challenges when adopting transdisciplinary approaches. In this sense, their conceptions about transdisciplinary practice should deserve more attention. Although some studies have inspected how STEM teachers or science teachers conceptualized STEM education (e.g., Dare et al., 2019; Hackman et al., 2021), there is no literature examining teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice within the context of a specific academic subject (e.g., chemistry). More importantly, previous literature focused exclusively on their conceptions, but did not further explore the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions. Therefore, to address these research gaps, this study would investigate the conceptions of in-service chemistry teachers (ICTs) about transdisciplinary practice and the underlying reasons, in the era of curriculum reform. The significance of this study is to reveal the problems existing in teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice, and provide suggestions for promoting teachers’ understanding of it and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Theoretical Framework Vasquez et al. (2013) proposed a comprehensive framework about the levels of STEM integration. As disciplines are increasingly connected to each other, STEM integration is classified into four levels, namely disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary (Vasquez et al., 2013). On the disciplinary level, knowledge and skills of each discipline are learned separately; the multidisciplinary level also involves the separate learning of each discipline, but with a common theme; the interdisciplinary level further deepens disciplinary knowledge and skills, by learning closely linked concepts and skills from two or more disciplines; on the transdisciplinary level, tightly linked knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines are applied to solve real-world problems, thus shaping the learning experience (Vasquez et al., 2013). From disciplinary to transdisciplinary, knowledge and skills of various disciplines are increasingly connected. Furthermore, the former three levels focus on the acquisition of knowledge and skills, while the transdisciplinary level emphasizes the application of knowledge and skills, solutions of real-world problems, and the shaping of learning experience. Figure 1 shows the increasing levels of STEM integration. According to Chinese chemistry curriculum standards, “transdisciplinary practice” is carried out through practical activities; it applies the knowledge of chemistry, technology, engineering and other disciplines; it aims to design and evaluate the solutions of real-world problems, and make and optimize the project products (MoE, 2022). Referring to the illustration of transdisciplinary practice by the designers of the curriculum standards, there are three key elements included in its connotation, that is, applying knowledge and skills from multiple disciplines, solving real-world problems, and conducting practical activities (Hu & Zhang, 2022). As known to us, in educational practice, practical activities are conducted by students, which is bound to shape their learning experience. According to Vasquez et al. (2013), the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration involves the application of knowledge and skills, solutions of real-world problems, and the shaping of learning experience. Hence, it can be inferred that transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry curriculum standards has the same connotation as the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration. Plus, STEM practice is usually led by one discipline, and requires integrating contents from other disciplines, to support the learning of the leading discipline (Honey et al., 2014). Therefore, it can be concluded that transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry curriculum is centered on chemistry-related social problems, and students integrate and apply knowledge and skills of chemistry, engineering, technology and other disciplines, to solve real-world problems through conducting practical activities. As mentioned earlier, there have been some studies exploring how science teachers conceptualized STEM education, which mainly involved four themes. The first one is “essential characteristics of STEM education”. Open-ended questions were often adopted by researchers to inspect whether teachers could correctly understand the characteristics of STEM education (Radloff & Guzey, 2016; Maambo, 2023; Yilmazoglu, 2024). The second one is “relations between STEM disciplines”. In previous studies, teachers were required to draw a graph to represent subject relations or make selections from given subject relation representation graphs (Radloff & Guzey, 2016; Dare et al., 2019). The third one is “values of STEM education”. Open-ended questions were often employed to examine whether teachers can comprehensively describe the values of STEM education (Yildirim, 2021; Ciftci et al., 2022; Kececi, 2023). The last one is “factors affecting STEM education implementation”. Researchers usually used Likert-scale items or open-ended questions to explore how teachers perceived the favorable and unfavorable factors that may affect the implementation of STEM education (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Hackman et al., 2021; Giamellaro et al., 2025). According to Hu et al. (2024), above four themes belong to the philosophical category of STEM education. Specifically, the ontology of STEM education involves “essential characteristics of STEM education” and “relations between STEM disciplines”; the axiology of STEM education involves “values of STEM education”; the epistemology of STEM education involves “factors affecting STEM education implementation” (Hu et al., 2024). Given the relationship between transdisciplinary practice in chemistry curriculum standards and the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration discussed above, we have established the theoretical framework inspired by the research of STEM education. This study would investigate how in-service chemistry teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice from four themes, namely essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, values of transdisciplinary practice, and factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation (as show in Fig. 2 ). Research Questions This study aimed to investigate in-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and the reasons for their conceptions, answering the following research questions. How do in-service chemistry teachers understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice? How do in-service chemistry teachers represent the relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice? How do in-service chemistry teachers describe the values of transdisciplinary practice? How do in-service chemistry teachers perceive the factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation? Methodology Participants The present study was conducted in Jiangsu province in China, with well-developed economy and education. Participants consisted of 241 in-service chemistry teachers with various teaching ages, from different levels of junior high schools (i.e., exemplary schools and ordinary schools). After the release of the latest curriculum standards in 2022, the reform-based curriculum was officially implemented in the autumn of 2024. Prior to the implementation of the new curriculum, teachers participated in the reform-based curriculum training activities organized by the local educational authorities (mainly introducing the changes in curriculum objectives, structure and content). Through these activities, teachers gained a preliminary understanding of the learning theme of transdisciplinary practice. This study focused on teachers’ conceptions of transdisciplinary practice during the initial phase of new curriculum implementation. The Participants’ background information is displayed in Fig. 3 , which illustrates the diversity and representativeness of the sample. Noticeably, this study would not compare teachers’ conceptions of transdisciplinary practice based on the differences of background information. Research Procedure The research procedure includes two stages, namely a questionnaire survey (to inspect in-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice) and an in-depth interview (to explore the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions). Stage 1: questionnaire survey The design process of questionnaire was elaborated as follows, which involves four themes. Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) adopts an open-ended question, where teachers need to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice using keywords. Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice) presents seven types of subject relation representation graphs (namely independent, integrated, emphasis on practical application and problem solving, chemistry as the leading subject, engineering as context, emphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching, and emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design), which were adapted from previous studies (Radloff & Guzey, 2016; Dare et al., 2017). It employs a multiple-choice question, where teachers can choose at most three graphs that they agree with. Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice) adopts an open-ended question, requiring teachers to use keywords to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice. Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) includes 20 Likert-scale items about various factors that may affect transdisciplinary practice implementation. These items were designed based on previous literature (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Al Salami et al., 2017; Dong et al., 2020; Hackman et al., 2021; Hamad et al., 2022), including 6 internal factors (derived from teachers themselves), 8 external factors (derived from schools or education contexts), and 6 student factors (derived from students or their families). The complete questionnaire is shown in Appendix 1. Chemistry teaching supervisors in Jiangsu province were invited by us to distribute paper questionnaires when they organized offline teaching and research activities. The distribution and collection work were carried out from September to October in 2024. All participants have signed consent letters for completing the questionnaire. A total of 263 questionnaires were distributed, and 241 valid questionnaires were finally collected. The recovery rate of valid questionnaires was 91.6%. The rules of questionnaire data analysis were specified as follows. Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) and Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice) adopted open-ended questions. According to the grounded theory, we followed a bottom-to-up procedure to analyze and code the data, including open coding, axical coding, and selective coding (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Firstly, the keywords mentioned by participants were classified to obtain open codes, and the frequency of each open code was counted. Secondly, employing constant comparative methods (Charmaz, 2000), the open codes were compared and integrated to obtain axical codes. Finally, the axical codes were merged to determine selective codes. Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice) used a multiple-choice question. The frequencies of seven subject relation representation graphs were counted separately. The higher frequency of a certain graph means that teachers shows a higher recognition of it. Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) adopted Likert-scale items, with five options of “strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree”, which were respectively endowed with 1 ~ 5 points. The higher score of a certain favorable factor shows that teachers believe it can promote transdisciplinary practice implementation more effectively; the higher score of a certain unfavorable factor indicates that teachers think it may hinder the implementation more greatly. The validity of questionnaire was guaranteed by two measures. First, a pre-survey was conducted among 10 chemistry teachers, and questions were revised based on their suggestions. For example, they argued that compared to a ranking question, a multiple-choice question is more suitable for Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice). Second, two experts of chemical education were invited to review the questionnaire, in order to assess the rigor of wordings and scientificity of questions. The reliability of data analysis was also ensured. When analyzing data of Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) and Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice), three coders (the first three authors) minimized subjective biases or assumptions, coded the data independently, and discussed different opinions to reach the consensus. The reliability of Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) was calculated by internal consistency. The Cronbach α coefficient for all 20 items is 0.894, and the Cronbach α coefficient for three constructs is 0.792 (internal factors), 0.818 (external factors), and 0.709 (student factors), all greater than 0.7. It means that this instrument is reliable and stable to collect data (Nunnally, 1978). Stage 2: in-depth interview To further explore the reasons why in-service chemistry teachers held corresponding conceptions about transdisciplinary practice, the participants whose conceptions are similar to the overall results revealed by the questionnaire survey were selected as the interviewees. They generally met the following conditions: (1) they tended to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from a pedagogical perspective; (2) among seven types of graphs, they chose “integrated”, “emphasis on practical application and problem solving” or “chemistry as the leading subject”; (3) they tended to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of student development; (4) they thought the impacts of various factors on transdisciplinary practice implementation are not entirely the same. Nine teachers were initially invited, and six of them were willing to receive the interview. They were numbered as T1 ~ T6 respectively, whose background information was displayed in Table 1 . The interview research was carried out in January in 2025. Table 1 Background information of six interviewees Teacher Level of school Teaching age T1 exemplary school 7 years T2 ordinary school 24 years T3 ordinary school 12 years T4 ordinary school 38 years T5 exemplary school 3 years T6 exemplary school 19 years The interview outline was developed based on four themes (shown in Appendix 2), which was further modified according to the questionnaire finished by each teacher. Before the interview, we informed participants of the research purpose, allowed them to withdraw from the interview at any time, promised them to protect their privacy via anonymity. We adopted face-to-face interviews, with an average interview duration of 40 minutes. Teachers explained in interviews why they held certain conceptions or opinions. Having obtained permission from participants, the entire interview process was recorded. During the interview, the researcher actively guided participants to express their opinions, but not commented on participants’ opinions to avoid interference. After the interview, the recordings were converted into verbatim transcripts for further data analysis. The interviews about teachers’ explanations were used as sources to explore the underlying reasons for their conceptions. The interview data were analyzed and coded by several steps (Charmaz, 2000; Patton, 2015; Creswell & Poth, 2018). First, coders minimized subjective bias or assumptions by reading verbatim manuscripts repeatedly and understanding participants’ opinions deeply. Second, key statements were extracted and initial codes were obtained. Finally, by constant comparative methods, the initial codes were compared and merged to determine the reasons. For example, Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) included 5 initial codes, namely “national education documents”, “chemistry curriculum standards”, “chemistry textbooks”, “how teachers design transdisciplinary courses”, and “how students conduct transdisciplinary activities”. The former three initial codes belong to relevant literature and books, while the latter two initial codes are related to teachers’ personal teaching experience. Therefore, we ultimately summarized two reasons for teachers’ understandings of the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, namely “impacts of relevant books and literature”, and “perceptions of own teaching experience”. Table 2 presents all the initial codes and the reasons for 4 themes, which would be elaborated in “Results”. Table 2 Initial codes and reasons for 4 themes Themes Reasons Initial codes essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice impacts of relevant books and literature national education documents, chemistry curriculum standards, chemistry textbooks perceptions of own teaching experience how teachers design transdisciplinary courses, how students conduct transdisciplinary activities relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice equal status of various disciplines no disparities between the importance of various disciplines, no excessive emphasis on a certain discipline cognition of science teaching orientation science teaching stresses applying knowledge to solve problems, science teaching cultivates students’ ability by discovering and solving problems, the ultimate goal of learning scientific knowledge is to solve real-world problems impacts of own subject background more familiar with chemistry, the importance of chemistry limitations of own engineering knowledge unfamiliar with engineering, not good at teaching engineering knowledge, engineering knowledge is difficult, difficult to deeply popularize engineering knowledge values of transdisciplinary practice student-based education concept the starting point of teaching is to cultivate students’ ability and literacy, organize teaching activities according to students’ developmental needs views on educational goals at different school stages junior high school is the initial stage, transdisciplinary practice of junior high school is not difficult, not easy to predict students’ future development factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation emphasis on subjective functions of students develop students’ subjective initiative, stimulate students’ interest, mobilize students’ enthusiasm decoupling of transdisciplinary practice from exam evaluation difficult to be evaluated by high school entrance examinations, selection purpose of examinations, importance of exam achievements, the pressure of admission needing support of high-quality curriculum resources and cases lack of specific implementation plans, existing curriculum resources cannot be directly applied, difficult to develop high-quality transdisciplinary courses To ensure the validity of interview outline, two experts in the field of chemistry education were invited to judge whether the questions are convenient for participants to answer. To ensure the trustworthiness of data analysis, three coders (the first three authors) independently analyzed and coded the data, and discussed different opinions to reach the consensus. Then, the verbatim transcripts and corresponding explanations and codes were returned to participants for confirmation to reflect their true beliefs. Results Results of Questionnaire Survey ICTs’ understandings of essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice Table 3 shows the analysis results of Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice), including 79 open codes, 5 axical codes, and 2 selective codes. The open codes whose frequency were over 10 are presented in Table 3, while those whose frequency were less than 10 are not presented in it, but their frequencies have been counted into the axical code which they belong to. Hence, in Table 3, the total frequency of open codes is less than that of axical codes. Since each teacher generally mentioned more than one code, the total frequency of all codes (1018) exceeded the number of participants (241). Table 3 Analysis results of Theme 1 Selective codes Axical codes Open codes (frequency over 10) disciplinary (350) disciplinary connections (308) knowledge integration (99), connections between different disciplines (58), multidisciplinary (28), interdisciplinary (24), connections between chemistry and other disciplines (11), knowledge system (10) knowledge application (42) emphasis on knowledge application (35) pedagogical (668) problem solving (97) real problem scenarios (53), solve real-world problems (39) curriculum design (292) innovative design of courses (48), connected to real life (46), the diversity of teaching activities (42), feasibility (16), connected to social production (11), student-centered teaching (10) learning activities (279) practical activities (93), comprehensive learning (63), inquiry activities (59), openness and flexibility of classroom activities (29), interesting (20), problem-oriented learning (16), collaborative learning (13), experimental activities (12) Note: the number in parentheses indicates the frequency of each code, namely the number of times mentioned by participants. It can be seen that in-service chemistry teachers understood the connotation of transdisciplinary practice from disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives. In terms of the disciplinary perspective, almost all teachers mentioned the aspect of disciplinary connections (e.g., knowledge integration, connections between different disciplines). Whereas, only less than 20% of them mentioned the aspect of knowledge application (e.g., emphasis on knowledge application, comprehensive apply knowledge). Turning to the pedagogical perspective, most teachers touched upon the aspects of curriculum design (e.g., innovative design of courses, connected to real life) and learning activities (e.g., practical activities, inquiry activities). Moreover, only about 40% of participants emphasized the aspect of problem solving (e.g., real problem scenarios, solve real-world problems). Given that the frequency percentages of disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives were respectively at 34.4% and 65.6% (N=1018), we believed that chemistry teachers were more inclined to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective. A further comparison revealed that the aspects of disciplinary connections and learning activities (respectively with a frequency of 308 and 279) were mentioned by teachers much more frequently than problem solving and knowledge application (respectively with a frequency of 97 and 42). Thus, we deemed that chemistry teachers to some extent failed to fully understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice. ICTs’ representations of relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice Table 4 displays the analysis results of Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice), including the frequencies and percentages of seven subject relation representation graphs. Since each teacher could choose no more than 3 graphs which they agreed with, the total frequency of seven graphs (665) was less than three times the number of participants (241). Table 4 Analysis results of Theme 2 Subject relation representation graph Frequency Percentage integrated 197 81.74% emphasis on practical application and problem solving 194 80.50% chemistry as the leading subject 108 44.81% emphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching 60 24.90% emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design 50 20.75% engineering as context 33 13.69% independent 23 9.54% Among seven types of graphs, in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with the “integrated” and “emphasis on practical application and problem solving”, whose frequencies were over 80%. Besides, participants somewhat agreed with “chemistry as the leading subject”, whose frequency percentage was about half of that of the former two graphs. However, only less than 25% of participants recognized “emphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching” and “emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design”. The lowest recognition was due to “engineering as context” and “independent”, whose frequencies were about 10%. In view of the higher frequencies of “integrated” and “emphasis on practical application and problem solving”, we considered that when representing the relationship between various disciplines, chemistry teachers paid more attention to disciplinary knowledge integration and real-world problems solving. Plus, they could realize the importance of chemistry, believing that transdisciplinary practice in chemistry curriculum should be led by chemistry. However, they had a lower recognition of engineering itself. ICTs’ descriptions of values of transdisciplinary practice Table 5 shows the analysis results of Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice), including 83 open codes, 8 axical codes, and 3 selective codes (i.e., student development, education development, and national development). As for student development, its open codes whose frequency were over 10 are presented in Table 4, while those whose frequency were less than 10 are not presented in it, but their frequencies have been counted. Thus, in Table 5, the total frequency of open codes is less than that of the selective code (i.e., student development). Whereas, the frequencies of open codes which belong to other two selective codes were much smaller, so it may be more suitable to present them in Table 5. Thus, the total frequency of open codes is equal to that of corresponding selective codes (i.e., education development and national development). Since each teacher generally mentioned more than one code, the total frequency of all open codes (860) exceeded the number of participants (241). Table 5 Analysis results of Theme 3 Selective codes Axical codes Open codes student development (802) ability cultivation (386) innovative skills (98), problem-solving skills (61), collaborative skills (50), comprehensive ability (43), ability to apply knowledge (33), practical skills (31), hands-on skills (28), scientific inquiry skills (15), communication skills (10) cognitive development (161) deep understand subject knowledge (31), broaden horizons (26), divergent thinking (18), broaden the scope of knowledge (14), comprehensive thinking (14), integrate knowledge (10), knowledge transfer and association (10) literacy improvement (124) comprehensive literacy (57), all-round development (26), chemistry core literacy (23), scientific literacy (10) attitudes and responsibility (131) stimulate learning interest and motivation (74), social responsibility (16), adapt to the needs of social development (14) education development (30) discipline construction (4) promote exchange and cooperation between disciplines (2), improve the level of disciplinary integration (1), promote discipline construction (1) education quality (26) improve teaching abilities (11), improve learning effectiveness (9), optimize teaching resources (1), promote curriculum reform (1), promote quality-oriented education (1), improve teaching efficiency (1), improve teachers’ professional literacy (1), promote school progress (1) national development (28) talent cultivation (16) comprehensive talents (5), innovative talents (4), scientific and technological talents (2), diversified talents (2), transdisciplinary talents (1), practical talents (1), compound talents (1) social progress (12) social sustainable development (4), promote social development, (3) promote science and technology advancement (2), improve civic literacy (1), solve industrial problems (1), protect the environment (1) It is indicated that almost all teachers focused on the contributions of transdisciplinary practice to student development, with an overwhelming frequency proportion of 93.3%. They generally provided explanations from the aspects of ability cultivation (e.g., innovative skills, problem-solving skills), cognitive development (e.g., deep understand subject knowledge, broaden the scope of knowledge), literacy improvement (e.g., comprehensive literacy, chemistry core literacy), and attitudes and responsibility (e.g., stimulate learning interest and motivation, social responsibility). Some teachers described the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of education development, with a frequency proportion of 3.5%. They explained from the aspects of discipline construction (e.g., promote exchange and cooperation between disciplines, improve the level of disciplinary integration) and education quality (e.g., improve teaching abilities, promote curriculum reform). Additionally, other teachers described its values from the perspective of national development, whose frequency proportion was 3.2%. They mainly provided explanations from the aspects of talent cultivation (e.g., comprehensive talents, innovative talents) and social progress (e.g., social sustainable development, promote science and technology advancement). Considering that the frequency of student development (802) was far more than that of education development and national development (58), we came to the conclusion that chemistry teachers showed an incomprehensive understanding about the values of transdisciplinary practice, because they mainly focused on its impacts on student development, but almost neglected its impacts on education development and national development. ICTs’ perceptions of factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation Table 6 displays the analysis results of Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation), including favorable and unfavorable factors. These factors generally had high scores (the average score of each item was between 3.81 and 4.67), which indicated that in-service chemistry teachers believed the implementation of transdisciplinary practice is faced with various opportunities and challenges. Table 6 Analysis results of Theme 4 Category of factors Average score of each construct favorable factors internal factors 4.59 external factors 4.54 student factors 4.67 unfavorable factors internal factors 4.21 external factors 4.32 student factors 4.16 In terms of favorable factors, variance analysis revealed a significant difference among the scores of three constructs ( F =10.262, p ＜0.05). A further pairwise comparisons showed that the score of student factors was significantly higher than that of internal or external factors, while there was no significant difference between internal and external factors. That is to say, compared to internal and external factors, chemistry teachers believed that student factors (i.e., students’ cooperation and support, effective teamwork, students’ interest) can more effectively promote the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Turning to unfavorable factors, variance analysis indicated a significant difference among the scores of three constructs ( F =5.977, p ＜0.05). A further pairwise comparisons revealed that the score of external factors was significantly higher than that of internal or student factors, while no significant difference was found between internal and student factors. In other words, compared to internal and student factors, chemistry teachers considered that external factors (i.e., lack of transdisciplinary course resources, the score-oriented evaluation system, the pressure of senior high school entrance examinations, limited teaching hours) would greatly hinder the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. To sum up, chemistry teachers thought positive student factors (such as students’ cooperation and support, and students’ interest) are more conducive to implementing transdisciplinary practice, while external challenges (such as lack of transdisciplinary course resources, and score-oriented evaluation systems) may cause great difficulties to implement transdisciplinary practice. Findings of In-depth Interview Reasons for ICTs’ understandings of essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice The results of survey indicated that in-service chemistry teachers tended to understand the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from a pedagogical perspective (e.g., real problem scenarios, innovative design of courses, practical activities). Two main reasons were revealed by the in-depth interview. The first reason is the impacts of relevant books and literature. For illustration, T1 stated that my provincial-level research project is related to transdisciplinary practice. When applying for it, I read national education documents, chemistry curriculum standards and textbooks, and learned about requirements for student development in basic education, such as developing problem-solving skills, scientific inquiry skills, and innovation skills. The second reason is teachers’ perceptions of own teaching experience. For example, T6 said that when organizing transdisciplinary teaching, I create a real and specific problem scenario to stimulate students’ interest; the scenario comes from daily life or social production, but cannot be too limited, which encourages students to propose multiple solutions by conducting practical activities. Similarly, other interviewees also explained their opinions based on teaching experience, which seems to be the main source of their definitions of transdisciplinary practice. Reasons for ICTs’ representations of relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice The results of in-depth interview explained why in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with “integrated” and “emphasis on practical application and problem solving” when representing relations between various disciplines. Teachers’ recognition of “integrated” stems from their emphasis on the equal status of various disciplines. For instance, T5 explained that we should not overly emphasize one or two subjects, which may limit students’ thinking. Teachers’ recognition of “emphasis on practical application and problem solving” comes from their cognition of science teaching orientation. T4 noted that the ultimate goal of learning scientific knowledge is to solve real-world problems, and science teaching focuses on cultivating students’ key abilities in the process of discovering and solving problems. T4 believed science teaching aims to cultivate students’ problem-solving skills. In addition, teachers somewhat agreed with “chemistry as the leading subject”, which is mainly because of their own subject background. For illustration, T3 argued that I am more familiar with chemistry compared to other fields, so the transdisciplinary knowledge I can impart to students is definitely centered around chemistry. In-depth interview also explained why few in-service chemistry teachers prioritized “emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design” and “engineering as context”. Taken as an example, T2 said that most middle school teachers are unfamiliar with engineering, and I am not clear about its definition; in the teaching process, I do not want to involve too much in areas that I am not very good at, which causes difficulties for me to coordinate the pace of classroom teaching. It can be seen that teachers’ low recognition of engineering is mainly due to their limited engineering knowledge. Reasons for ICTs’ descriptions of values of transdisciplinary practice The survey suggested that in-service chemistry teachers tended to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of student development (e.g., innovative skills, problem-solving skills, collaborative skills). For illustration, T3 argued that I set teaching goals and organize teaching activities based on students’ developmental needs; when completing transdisciplinary tasks, students comprehensively apply knowledge to solve problems, thereby enhancing problem-solving skills; students actively think and collaborate to seek solutions, thereby cultivating innovative skills and collaborative skills. Other interviewees also provided explanations based on the student-based education concept, which is the main reason for their conceptions about the values of transdisciplinary practice. Furthermore, although the interviewed participants did not describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of national development when answering the questionnaire, they indeed agreed with this viewpoint when receiving interviews. However, they still held reservations about the aspect of talent cultivation, mainly due to their views on educational goals at different school stages. For example, T1 explained that students have limited knowledge in the basic education stage; they only can solve simple problems, and have troubles in solving complex problems from social production; transdisciplinary activities in junior high schools are not too difficult, and just play a guiding role; whether students can eventually become innovative talents depends on whether they can receive relevant training in the future (such as in higher education or workplace). Reasons for ICTs’ perceptions of factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation In-service chemistry teachers believed that student factors (e.g., students’ interest and effective teamwork) can promote transdisciplinary implementation more greatly. The main reason revealed by in-depth interview is that they emphasized on the subjective functions of students. For illustration, T5 deemed that we should develop students’ subjective initiative and stimulate students’ interest, so that they are willing to invest more time and energy, thus improving the efficiency of transdisciplinary practice implementation. Teachers were concerned that external factors (e.g., score-oriented evaluation systems, pressure of senior high school entrance examinations) may cause great difficulties to implement transdisciplinary practice. This is mainly because the fact that transdisciplinary practice is decoupled from exam evaluation. For instance, T4 noted that although new curriculum standards have clearly required the implementation of transdisciplinary practice, we realize that high school entrance examination papers cannot evaluate students’ transdisciplinary ability and literacy; in the context of exam-oriented education, we usually attach more importance to the acquisition of subject knowledge. Thus, it is easy to see that exam-oriented education ideas has deeply rooted, and caused a series of consequences (including traditional evaluation systems, pressure of admission, limited teaching hours), which exert negative impacts on the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Additionally, teachers believed that transdisciplinary practice implementation may be hindered by the lack of transdisciplinary course resources and materials, which is mainly because they need support of external high-quality curriculum resources and cases. For example, T6 pointed out that new textbooks only simply lists the teaching goals of transdisciplinary practice, but lacks specific implementation plans (such as specific teaching materials and curriculum design); it is difficult to find feasible high-quality teaching cases online . Hence, it is indicated that the lack of specific and feasible transdisciplinary cases and high-quality transdisciplinary courses would greatly hinder the implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Conclusions and Discussions In this study, a questionnaire survey and in-depth interview were conducted to explore in-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and the reasons. The key findings are concluded in Figure 4. They did not fully understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, mentioning more about subject connection and learning activities, but less about problem solving and knowledge application; they tended to define transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective, which was mainly due to impacts of books and literature and perceptions of teaching experience. When representing relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, they generally agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving, owing to their emphasis on equal status of various disciplines and their cognition of science teaching orientation; they emphasized chemistry but neglected engineering, because of their subject background and limited engineering knowledge. They described the values of transdisciplinary practice incomprehensively, because they focused on student development based on the student-based education concept, but more or less neglected national development based on their views on educational goals at different school stages. They believed transdisciplinary practice implementation can be promoted by student factors (such as students’ interest), given the subjective functions of students; it is also faced with some external challenges (such as insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems), due to the lack of high-quality curriculum resources and the decoupling of transdisciplinary practice from exam evaluation. In-service chemistry teachers tended to understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective (influenced by relevant documents and teaching experience). Some studies also revealed that teachers tended to define STEM education from a pedagogical perspective (Radloff & Guzey, 2016; Yilmazoglu, 2024), while others found that teachers defined it from a disciplinary perspective (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Kececi, 2023). Combined with the findings of this study, it can be inferred that differences in the way essential characteristics are stated in education documents may lead teachers to provide definitions from different perspectives. Furthermore, almost all participants mentioned disciplinary connections and learning activities, while less of them mentioned problem solving and knowledge application. However, the connotation of transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry education involves integrating and applying multidisciplinary knowledge and skills, solving real-world problems, and conducting practical activities. Based on the levels of STEM integration (Vasquez et al., 2013), we found that the majority of participants only understood transdisciplinary practice from the interdisciplinary level, not up to the transdisciplinary level. It can be seen that they superficially understood the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice. The potential reason may be that teachers only defined transdisciplinary practice based on its literal meaning. Specifically, it is easy for participants to associate “transdisciplinary” with knowledge integration and multidisciplinary (belong to discipline connections), and to associate “practice” with practical activities (belong to learning activities). Whereas, problem solving and knowledge application need to be further explored by them, going beyond the literal meaning of “transdisciplinary practice”. When representing relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving. Previous research also revealed similar findings: teachers argued that STEM disciplines are interrelated (Guler et al., 2017); teachers attached importance to solving real-world problems (Dare et al., 2019). What’s more, in-service chemistry teachers tended to endow various disciplines with different degrees of importance. Similarly, in the study of Dare et al. (2019), teachers paid more attention to science than engineering. Among 141 papers presented at the 2014 STEM conference in Vancouver, 45% were devoted to science, but only 9% to engineering (English, 2016). In this study, in-service chemistry teachers stressed the role of chemistry (due to their subject background), but less valued engineering (due to their limited engineering knowledge). Other research also found that teachers held misunderstandings of engineering (Bagiati & Evangelou, 2015), had troubles in integrating engineering (Lau & Multani, 2018), and were not confident in teaching engineering (Smith et al., 2015). It seems to be a common problem. The potential reasons may be that teachers think engineering knowledge is too complex for middle students to grasp; engineering knowledge is not much correlated with examinations, which weakens the emphasis laid on engineering. When describing the values of transdisciplinary practice, in-service chemistry teachers focused on its contributions to student development, which stemmed from the student-based education concept. This is closely related to the fact that in China, the instructional mode is shifting from teacher-centered towards student-centered in recent years (Authors, 2015). Specifically, teachers generally design teaching goals and organize teaching activities according to students’ developmental needs, so students should achieve improvement after completing transdisciplinary learning. Meanwhile, in-service chemistry teachers more or less neglected its contributions to national development. It can be seen that they incomprehensively understood the values of transdisciplinary practice. The main reason is that participants believed transdisciplinary practice in basic education stage is just an initial step to achieve the goals of cultivating national talents. Other research also revealed similar results. For example, in the study of Yildirim (2021), when describing the importance of STEM education, all teachers focused exclusively its impact on student development, but completely neglected national development. For another example, in the study of Ciftci et al. (2022), teachers were required to describe the contributions of STEM education. The frequency of student development accounted for a dominating percentage, while only 0.74% was due to national development. Hence, we assumed that it is a common phenomenon for teachers to perceive the values of transdisciplinary practice (or STEM education). When judging the impacts of various factors on transdisciplinary practice implementation, in-service chemistry teachers believed that positive student factors (e.g., students’ interest) are more effective in promoting its implementation. This is mainly because they lay emphasis on the subjective functions of students in education practice, and view students as active discoverers and explorers (Lin, et al., 2003). It is easy to understand that if students are interested in transdisciplinary practice, they will actively participate in transdisciplinary activities, thus facilitating its implementation. What’s more, in-service chemistry teachers were worried that transdisciplinary practice implementation is faced with two external challenges, namely insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems. These findings could be explained by Chinese education context. First, transdisciplinary practice is a new education concept in China, and not all teachers can thoroughly understand it. Most teachers are accustomed to the subject-based teaching and are not good at integrating other subjects, so it is difficult for them to develop high-quality transdisciplinary courses. Second, “culture of examination” is prevalent in China, and the education system is dominated by high-stakes exams (Gu, 2004), such as high school entrance examinations and college entrance examinations. These high-stakes exams are in the form of paper-and-pencil tests, which are difficult to evaluate students’ performance in transdisciplinary practice (Chang & Chen, 2023). In such case, schools and teachers may pay less attention to transdisciplinary practice, which is bound to have a negative effect on its implementation. This study is unique in that it inspected how in-service teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice within the context of a chemistry curriculum reform, and further figured out the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions, which addressed existing research gaps. Meanwhile, the research instruments developed in this study have been verified by empirical data to be reliable and valid, which can be further adapted to explore the conceptions about transdisciplinary practice held by teachers from different subjects (such as physics and biology). Therefore, we believed that our research has made some contributions to the fields of science education and teacher education. Implications and Limitations To improve in-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice, we provided the following suggestions. First, seminars on transdisciplinary practice should be conducted among teachers to elaborate its essential characteristics and social values in more details. On one hand, combining the contents of chemistry curriculum standards with the levels of STEM integration, teachers can realize that transdisciplinary practice involves applying multidisciplinary knowledge and skills, solving real-world problems, and shaping learning experience (or conducting practical activities). On the other hand, based on national education documents, teachers can understand that transdisciplinary practice is conducive to addressing global challenges (such as energy crisis and climate change), cultivating high-end talents (such as innovative talents and practical talents), and enhancing economic development and national competitiveness. Second, attention should be paid to engineering education and improve teachers’ ability and confidence in engineering integration. On one hand, in China, engineering education is often neglected in basic education. When arranging courses for basic education, it is necessary to improve the proportion of engineering knowledge and develop engineering integration courses (such as chemical engineering and biological engineering), which can provide support not only for teachers to teach engineering, but also for students to cultivate engineering thinking. On the other hand, it is critical to offer teachers opportunities to participate in engineering professional development. Experts can be invited to popularize engineering knowledge to teachers, and teachers can receive training on how to design engineering-based courses. Finally, measures should be taken to reduce the external challenges of implementing transdisciplinary practice, especially about insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems. On one hand, learning communities on transdisciplinary practice can be established for teachers to regularly share curriculum resources; experts had better design high-quality transdisciplinary courses, including determining learning objectives and designing learning activities, so as to reduce the difficulty for teachers to develop transdisciplinary curriculum by themselves. On the hand, it is crucial to adopt a scientific and reasonable evaluation system. Process evaluation should be applied to assess students’ performance in transdisciplinary activities, including engineering design, innovative thinking, problem solving, cooperation and communication, etc. In light of the international tendency towards transdisciplinary education, we believed that above suggestions are not only applicable to China, but also to other countries or regions, especially where transdisciplinary education is just emerging. Despite some theoretical and practical implications discussed above, there are some limitations in our research. Firstly, the participants of this study are from a province, with well-developed economy and education. Whereas, the attention paid to transdisciplinary practice and the status of transdisciplinary practice implementation usually vary across different regions, so it would be very cautious to generalize the results of this study to other regions or countries. Secondly, the researchers inevitably have an effect on the interview process. But we have taken some measures to minimize it. For instance, researchers were prohibited to commenting participants’ opinions when collecting data. Thirdly, although we have provided some explanations for the findings, due the limited number of interviewees, some problems have yet to be deeply explored. For example, few participants described the impacts of transdisciplinary practice on national development when answering the questionnaire, despite they somewhat agreed with this viewpoint when being interviewed. We express great expectations for enriching research on transdisciplinary practice. Above all, it is well-known that different science subjects have distinct inherent characteristics (Erduran & Dagher, 2014). Our research tools can be adapted and applied by future studies to explore teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice or STEM education, within the specific context of another subject (e.g., physics and biology), thus figuring out the similarities and differences. In addition, given the fact that teachers’ beliefs can influence their implementation of curriculum reform (Sun & Zhang, 2024), future research can further explore the relations between teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and implementation of it, such as how teachers’ conceptions affect their implementation of transdisciplinary practice. Declarations Data availability The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to individual privacy, but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Funding This research was sponsored by Education Science “14th Five-Year Plan” Key Program of Jiangsu Province (B-b/2024/01/195). Ethical approval Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the School of Teacher Education, Nantong University, on June 20, 2024 (Approval number: 20240601). The approval covered the design, data collection, and analysis procedures of the study involving human participants. All research procedures were conducted in accordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Informed consent Informed consent was obtained in writing from all participants before data collection. Participants were informed of the research purpose, their right to withdraw without penalty, and how their data would be used. Consent was obtained in September 2024 by the first author. Participants were assured that their data would remain anonymous and confidential. They were informed that the data would be used solely for academic purposes and that no identifiable information would be disclosed or published. All participants explicitly consented to the use of anonymized quotes in publication. References Authors. (2015). Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & Miranda M. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward transdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27 (1), 63–88. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23 (1), 112–128. Chang, C. C., & Chen, Y. K. (2023). A transdisciplinary STEM course integrated through project-based learning on robotics: perspective from teacher and student feedback. Asia Pacific Journal of Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2209698 Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ciftci, A., Topcu, M. S., & Foulk, J. A. (2022). Pre-service early childhood teachers’ views on STEM education and their STEM teaching practices. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40 (2), 207–233. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Daneshpour, H., & Kwegyir-Aful, E. (2022). Analysing transdisciplinary education: A scoping review, Science & Education, 31 , 1047–1074. Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2019). Creating a continuum of STEM models: Exploring how K-12 science teachers conceptualize STEM education. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (6), 1–20. Dong, Y., Wang, J., Yang, Y., & Kurup, P. M. (2020). Understanding intrinsic challenges to stem instructional practices for Chinese teachers based on their beliefs and knowledge base, International Journal of STEM education, 7 (1), 47–58. El-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M., & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in schools: Views from in-service science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science & Technology Education, 13 (6), 2459–2484. English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3 (1), 1–8. Erduran, S., & Dagher Z, (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories . Dordrecht: Springer. Flavian, H. (2024). Transdisciplinary teaching in inclusive schools: Promoting transdisciplinary education for learners with special needs . Dordrecht: Springer. Giamellaro, M., Ewing, B., & Siegel, D. (2025). Affordances and constraints to implementing project-based STEM: A case study of systemic school change. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23 (3), 849–869. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research . Chicago, IL: Adline. Guler, F., Cakiroglu, J., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2017). Pre-service science teachers’ conceptions of STEM education, In: Educational Conference on Education Research , Kopenhagen, Denmark. Gu, M. (2004). The cultural foundation to the Chinese education . Taiyuan: Shanxi Education Press (in Chinese). Hackman, S. T., Zhang, D., & He, J. (2021). Secondary school science teachers’ attitudes towards STEM education in Liberia. International Journal of Science Education, 43 (2), 223–246. Hamad, S., Tairab, H., Wardat, Y., Rabbani, L., Alarabi, K., Yousif, M., Abu-Al-Aishet, A., & Stoica, G. (2022). Understanding science teachers’ implementations of integrated STEM: Teacher perceptions and practice. Sustainability, 14 (6), 3594–3612. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research . Washington, D C: National Academies Press. Hu, J., & Zhang, K. (2022). Interpretation of chemistry curriculum standards of compulsory education (the 2022 version): Transdisciplinary practice. Chinese Journal of Chemical education, 43 (15), 13–18. (in Chinese). Hu, Y., Guo, K., & Li, J. (2024). The ontology, epistemology, and axiology of STEM education. Chinese Journal of Chemical education, 45 (1), 15–19. (in Chinese). Kececi, G. (2023). Determining pre-service science teachers’ understanding about STEM education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22 (5), 833–850. Lau, M., & Multani, S. (2018). Engineering STEM teacher learning: using a museum-based field experience to foster STEM teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for engineering. In: Uzzo S., Graves S., E. Shay, M. Harford, & R. Thompson (Eds.), Pedagogical content knowledge in STEM: research to practice (pp.195–213). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_11 Lin, C., Yang, Z., & Huang, X. (2003). Dictionary of psychology (Volume 1) . Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press (in Chinese). Maambo, C. M. (2023). Key stakeholders’ perceptions of STEM education in Zambia: A mixed methods inquiry . Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Chicago, Loyyola University. Ministry of Education [MoE]. (2022). The chemistry curriculum standards of compulsory education (the 2022 version) . Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press (in Chinese). National Science Board [NSB]. (2007). National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education System . Virginia: National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsb07114/nsb07114.pdf Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods . New York: McGraw. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Radloff, J., & Guzey, S. (2016). Investigating preservice STEM teacher conceptions of STEM education. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 25 (5), 759–774. Smith, K. L., Rayfield, J., & McKim, B. R. (2015). Effective practices in STEM integration: Describing teacher perceptions and instructional method use. Journal of Agricultural Education, 56 (4), 182–201. Sun, D., & Zhang, Q. (2024). Evolution of teachers’ teaching beliefs about mathematics in a teacher education program. Behavioral Sciences, 14 (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100934 The White House, (2018), Charting a Course for Success: America’s strategy for STEM education , from https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf Vasquez, J., Sneider, C., & Comer, M. (2013). STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Yildirim, B. (2021). Preschool STEM activities: preschool teachers’ preparation and views. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49 (2), 149–162. Yilmazoglu, E. (2024). The role of engineering design-based instruction on pre-service chemistry teachers’ STEM conceptions and self-regulation . Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ankara, Middle East Technical University. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Appendices.pdf Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7105763","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":514575846,"identity":"c0633581-9cdc-490f-a272-16607a154403","order_by":0,"name":"Huinan Liu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nantong University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Huinan","middleName":"","lastName":"Liu","suffix":""},{"id":514575847,"identity":"413b63b5-451d-485c-b4e1-779229d7fca3","order_by":1,"name":"Bo Chen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nantong University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bo","middleName":"","lastName":"Chen","suffix":""},{"id":514575848,"identity":"b5bbfa42-8d7f-4378-a91c-12abe2d5d1ed","order_by":2,"name":"Jing Kang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nantong University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jing","middleName":"","lastName":"Kang","suffix":""},{"id":514575849,"identity":"5e800359-32d3-475a-830f-853141c128e3","order_by":3,"name":"Hualing Yang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nantong University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hualing","middleName":"","lastName":"Yang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-12 05:08:10","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91816813,"identity":"521009ed-7d92-41db-8241-b2080030a367","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-22 06:52:46","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":58626,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/89f4909fa96a4cbf67fd0fc7.png"},{"id":91816940,"identity":"f861b704-471a-4d2c-820e-198493f30006","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-22 06:53:03","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":37882,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/e08f8d1db724216803d6f7db.png"},{"id":91816909,"identity":"20957dcd-2438-402b-b3d4-b4489fda978a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-22 06:52:58","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":63083,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/fd88d88747ceedc58c11a80d.png"},{"id":91817056,"identity":"f4677134-fe2c-438a-9e1a-f490e93175f7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-22 06:53:25","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":32928,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/853edf71f46bb3195863354f.png"},{"id":91816604,"identity":"51464f4f-0020-4916-88a1-b426b1d23685","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-22 06:52:08","extension":"png","order_by":16,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":12620,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/5e86a541ce25daad1f3778b7.png"},{"id":91486381,"identity":"c1a4b095-0b17-41ff-a695-75b10db59991","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 04:56:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":55945,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe increasing levels of STEM integration\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/8e35c4fd689bb143bb7e08ec.jpg"},{"id":91487790,"identity":"00c3f922-d6c9-4f0f-939e-f60116ce01a7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 05:04:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":81442,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTheoretical framework of chemistry teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/1a777819ee7163cd59ea6230.jpg"},{"id":91489227,"identity":"df151e92-88e9-45ec-9370-f92f6d964272","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 05:12:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44109,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBackground information of participants\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/0f64f6c6c4bbea9266612931.jpg"},{"id":91486390,"identity":"7bc429cc-7f13-47f2-ad05-cbebe676f783","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 04:56:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":193779,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eIn-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and the reasons\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/432b69d5a6e6b26f680e53ef.jpg"},{"id":98484228,"identity":"824fd1fc-9181-41c3-ad43-55bb31047da1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-18 05:55:26","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1340328,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/6ecd4695-991b-496a-8e59-d49f9b9a2b8f.pdf"},{"id":91486395,"identity":"2ea4ba65-5cd8-4988-93c8-f8816d558e6f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-17 04:56:56","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":331760,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendices.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7105763/v1/4994988b3fafe984005488b0.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Investigating In-service Chemistry Teachers’ Conceptions about Transdisciplinary Practice in the Era of Curriculum Reform","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIt is a current trend that the curriculum reform of science education is shifting from single-disciplinary towards transdisciplinary approaches, to better meet real-world expectations (Daneshpour \u0026amp; Kwegyir-Aful, 2022). Transdisciplinary education helps foster effective learning of learners and fulfill sustainable development goals (Flavian, 2024). Transdisciplinary talents play a crucial role in technological development and era change, as they can address a variety of global challenges such as climate change, food security, energy crisis, labor shortage, and aging. As a model of transdisciplinary education, integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education has been formulated by many countries as a crucial educational strategy. Taking the United States of America (USA) as an example, \u003cem\u003eNational Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. STEM education System\u003c/em\u003e focused on the connection of STEM education between K-12 and undergraduate stages, and emphasized the importance of cultivating STEM teachers (NSB, 2007); \u003cem\u003eCharting a Course for Success: America\u0026rsquo;s Strategy for STEM education\u003c/em\u003e advocated that the federal government, society, and schools need to make joint efforts to jointly build the United States into the \u0026ldquo;North Star\u0026rdquo; of the global STEM field (The White House, 2018).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInfluenced by international educational trends, China\u0026rsquo;s science curriculum reform also emphasized transdisciplinary education. For instance, \u003cem\u003eChemistry Curriculum Standards of Compulsory Education (the 2022 version)\u003c/em\u003e first proposed the learning theme of \u0026ldquo;transdisciplinary practice\u0026rdquo; (called \u0026ldquo;kua xue ke shi jian\u0026rdquo; in Chinese), which advocates that in activities of transdisciplinary practice, students can integrate knowledge of chemistry, technology, engineering and other subjects, and form ideas and methods for transdisciplinary problem solutions, to cope with potential crises and uncertain challenges (MoE, 2022). Furthermore, curriculum standards have clearly stated that the number of teaching hours for transdisciplinary practice should account for more than 10% of the total hours, and provide ten teaching activities of transdisciplinary practice (e.g., test water quality and make water purifiers, explore the impact of soil acidity and alkalinity on plant growth, comprehensively utilize marine resources and produce salt). Thus, it can be seen that Chinese chemistry curriculum standards has clearly required enacting the educational idea of transdisciplinary practice in middle schools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs we know, teachers play a critical role in education, whose beliefs can influence the implementation of curriculum reform, including acquiring pedagogical content, designing teaching activities, and conducting teaching practice (Sun \u0026amp; Zhang, 2024). Undoubtedly, teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of transdisciplinary practice make a great difference to enact it. Especially in China, since teachers are accustomed to traditional subject-based teaching, they are likely to encounter great challenges when adopting transdisciplinary approaches. In this sense, their conceptions about transdisciplinary practice should deserve more attention. Although some studies have inspected how STEM teachers or science teachers conceptualized STEM education (e.g., Dare et al., 2019; Hackman et al., 2021), there is no literature examining teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice within the context of a specific academic subject (e.g., chemistry). More importantly, previous literature focused exclusively on their conceptions, but did not further explore the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions. Therefore, to address these research gaps, this study would investigate the conceptions of in-service chemistry teachers (ICTs) about transdisciplinary practice and the underlying reasons, in the era of curriculum reform. The significance of this study is to reveal the problems existing in teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice, and provide suggestions for promoting teachers\u0026rsquo; understanding of it and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTheoretical Framework\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVasquez et al. (2013) proposed a comprehensive framework about the levels of STEM integration. As disciplines are increasingly connected to each other, STEM integration is classified into four levels, namely disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary (Vasquez et al., 2013). On the disciplinary level, knowledge and skills of each discipline are learned separately; the multidisciplinary level also involves the separate learning of each discipline, but with a common theme; the interdisciplinary level further deepens disciplinary knowledge and skills, by learning closely linked concepts and skills from two or more disciplines; on the transdisciplinary level, tightly linked knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines are applied to solve real-world problems, thus shaping the learning experience (Vasquez et al., 2013). From disciplinary to transdisciplinary, knowledge and skills of various disciplines are increasingly connected. Furthermore, the former three levels focus on the acquisition of knowledge and skills, while the transdisciplinary level emphasizes the application of knowledge and skills, solutions of real-world problems, and the shaping of learning experience. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e shows the increasing levels of STEM integration.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to Chinese chemistry curriculum standards, \u0026ldquo;transdisciplinary practice\u0026rdquo; is carried out through practical activities; it applies the knowledge of chemistry, technology, engineering and other disciplines; it aims to design and evaluate the solutions of real-world problems, and make and optimize the project products (MoE, 2022). Referring to the illustration of transdisciplinary practice by the designers of the curriculum standards, there are three key elements included in its connotation, that is, applying knowledge and skills from multiple disciplines, solving real-world problems, and conducting practical activities (Hu \u0026amp; Zhang, 2022). As known to us, in educational practice, practical activities are conducted by students, which is bound to shape their learning experience. According to Vasquez et al. (2013), the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration involves the application of knowledge and skills, solutions of real-world problems, and the shaping of learning experience. Hence, it can be inferred that transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry curriculum standards has the same connotation as the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration. Plus, STEM practice is usually led by one discipline, and requires integrating contents from other disciplines, to support the learning of the leading discipline (Honey et al., 2014). Therefore, it can be concluded that transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry curriculum is centered on chemistry-related social problems, and students integrate and apply knowledge and skills of chemistry, engineering, technology and other disciplines, to solve real-world problems through conducting practical activities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs mentioned earlier, there have been some studies exploring how science teachers conceptualized STEM education, which mainly involved four themes. The first one is \u0026ldquo;essential characteristics of STEM education\u0026rdquo;. Open-ended questions were often adopted by researchers to inspect whether teachers could correctly understand the characteristics of STEM education (Radloff \u0026amp; Guzey, 2016; Maambo, 2023; Yilmazoglu, 2024). The second one is \u0026ldquo;relations between STEM disciplines\u0026rdquo;. In previous studies, teachers were required to draw a graph to represent subject relations or make selections from given subject relation representation graphs (Radloff \u0026amp; Guzey, 2016; Dare et al., 2019). The third one is \u0026ldquo;values of STEM education\u0026rdquo;. Open-ended questions were often employed to examine whether teachers can comprehensively describe the values of STEM education (Yildirim, 2021; Ciftci et al., 2022; Kececi, 2023). The last one is \u0026ldquo;factors affecting STEM education implementation\u0026rdquo;. Researchers usually used Likert-scale items or open-ended questions to explore how teachers perceived the favorable and unfavorable factors that may affect the implementation of STEM education (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Hackman et al., 2021; Giamellaro et al., 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to Hu et al. (2024), above four themes belong to the philosophical category of STEM education. Specifically, the ontology of STEM education involves \u0026ldquo;essential characteristics of STEM education\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;relations between STEM disciplines\u0026rdquo;; the axiology of STEM education involves \u0026ldquo;values of STEM education\u0026rdquo;; the epistemology of STEM education involves \u0026ldquo;factors affecting STEM education implementation\u0026rdquo; (Hu et al., 2024). Given the relationship between transdisciplinary practice in chemistry curriculum standards and the transdisciplinary level of STEM integration discussed above, we have established the theoretical framework inspired by the research of STEM education. This study would investigate how in-service chemistry teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice from four themes, namely essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, values of transdisciplinary practice, and factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation (as show in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study aimed to investigate in-service chemistry teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and the reasons for their conceptions, answering the following research questions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow do in-service chemistry teachers understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow do in-service chemistry teachers represent the relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow do in-service chemistry teachers describe the values of transdisciplinary practice?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow do in-service chemistry teachers perceive the factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study was conducted in Jiangsu province in China, with well-developed economy and education. Participants consisted of 241 in-service chemistry teachers with various teaching ages, from different levels of junior high schools (i.e., exemplary schools and ordinary schools). After the release of the latest curriculum standards in 2022, the reform-based curriculum was officially implemented in the autumn of 2024. Prior to the implementation of the new curriculum, teachers participated in the reform-based curriculum training activities organized by the local educational authorities (mainly introducing the changes in curriculum objectives, structure and content). Through these activities, teachers gained a preliminary understanding of the learning theme of transdisciplinary practice. This study focused on teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of transdisciplinary practice during the initial phase of new curriculum implementation. The Participants\u0026rsquo; background information is displayed in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, which illustrates the diversity and representativeness of the sample. Noticeably, this study would not compare teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of transdisciplinary practice based on the differences of background information.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch Procedure\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research procedure includes two stages, namely a questionnaire survey (to inspect in-service chemistry teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice) and an in-depth interview (to explore the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eStage 1: questionnaire survey\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe design process of questionnaire was elaborated as follows, which involves four themes. Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) adopts an open-ended question, where teachers need to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice using keywords. Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice) presents seven types of subject relation representation graphs (namely independent, integrated, emphasis on practical application and problem solving, chemistry as the leading subject, engineering as context, emphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching, and emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design), which were adapted from previous studies (Radloff \u0026amp; Guzey, 2016; Dare et al., 2017). It employs a multiple-choice question, where teachers can choose at most three graphs that they agree with. Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice) adopts an open-ended question, requiring teachers to use keywords to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice. Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) includes 20 Likert-scale items about various factors that may affect transdisciplinary practice implementation. These items were designed based on previous literature (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Al Salami et al., 2017; Dong et al., 2020; Hackman et al., 2021; Hamad et al., 2022), including 6 internal factors (derived from teachers themselves), 8 external factors (derived from schools or education contexts), and 6 student factors (derived from students or their families). The complete questionnaire is shown in Appendix 1.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eChemistry teaching supervisors in Jiangsu province were invited by us to distribute paper questionnaires when they organized offline teaching and research activities. The distribution and collection work were carried out from September to October in 2024. All participants have signed consent letters for completing the questionnaire. A total of 263 questionnaires were distributed, and 241 valid questionnaires were finally collected. The recovery rate of valid questionnaires was 91.6%.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe rules of questionnaire data analysis were specified as follows. Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) and Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice) adopted open-ended questions. According to the grounded theory, we followed a bottom-to-up procedure to analyze and code the data, including open coding, axical coding, and selective coding (Glaser \u0026amp; Strauss, 1967). Firstly, the keywords mentioned by participants were classified to obtain open codes, and the frequency of each open code was counted. Secondly, employing constant comparative methods (Charmaz, 2000), the open codes were compared and integrated to obtain axical codes. Finally, the axical codes were merged to determine selective codes. Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice) used a multiple-choice question. The frequencies of seven subject relation representation graphs were counted separately. The higher frequency of a certain graph means that teachers shows a higher recognition of it. Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) adopted Likert-scale items, with five options of \u0026ldquo;strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree\u0026rdquo;, which were respectively endowed with 1\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;5 points. The higher score of a certain favorable factor shows that teachers believe it can promote transdisciplinary practice implementation more effectively; the higher score of a certain unfavorable factor indicates that teachers think it may hinder the implementation more greatly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe validity of questionnaire was guaranteed by two measures. First, a pre-survey was conducted among 10 chemistry teachers, and questions were revised based on their suggestions. For example, they argued that compared to a ranking question, a multiple-choice question is more suitable for Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice). Second, two experts of chemical education were invited to review the questionnaire, in order to assess the rigor of wordings and scientificity of questions. The reliability of data analysis was also ensured. When analyzing data of Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) and Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice), three coders (the first three authors) minimized subjective biases or assumptions, coded the data independently, and discussed different opinions to reach the consensus. The reliability of Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation) was calculated by internal consistency. The Cronbach α coefficient for all 20 items is 0.894, and the Cronbach α coefficient for three constructs is 0.792 (internal factors), 0.818 (external factors), and 0.709 (student factors), all greater than 0.7. It means that this instrument is reliable and stable to collect data (Nunnally, 1978).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eStage 2: in-depth interview\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo further explore the reasons why in-service chemistry teachers held corresponding conceptions about transdisciplinary practice, the participants whose conceptions are similar to the overall results revealed by the questionnaire survey were selected as the interviewees. They generally met the following conditions: (1) they tended to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from a pedagogical perspective; (2) among seven types of graphs, they chose \u0026ldquo;integrated\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;emphasis on practical application and problem solving\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;chemistry as the leading subject\u0026rdquo;; (3) they tended to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of student development; (4) they thought the impacts of various factors on transdisciplinary practice implementation are not entirely the same. Nine teachers were initially invited, and six of them were willing to receive the interview. They were numbered as T1\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;T6 respectively, whose background information was displayed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. The interview research was carried out in January in 2025.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBackground information of six interviewees\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeacher\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLevel of school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeaching age\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eexemplary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eordinary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e24 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eordinary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eordinary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e38 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eexemplary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eexemplary school\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19 years\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe interview outline was developed based on four themes (shown in Appendix 2), which was further modified according to the questionnaire finished by each teacher. Before the interview, we informed participants of the research purpose, allowed them to withdraw from the interview at any time, promised them to protect their privacy via anonymity. We adopted face-to-face interviews, with an average interview duration of 40 minutes. Teachers explained in interviews why they held certain conceptions or opinions. Having obtained permission from participants, the entire interview process was recorded. During the interview, the researcher actively guided participants to express their opinions, but not commented on participants\u0026rsquo; opinions to avoid interference. After the interview, the recordings were converted into verbatim transcripts for further data analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe interviews about teachers\u0026rsquo; explanations were used as sources to explore the underlying reasons for their conceptions. The interview data were analyzed and coded by several steps (Charmaz, 2000; Patton, 2015; Creswell \u0026amp; Poth, 2018). First, coders minimized subjective bias or assumptions by reading verbatim manuscripts repeatedly and understanding participants\u0026rsquo; opinions deeply. Second, key statements were extracted and initial codes were obtained. Finally, by constant comparative methods, the initial codes were compared and merged to determine the reasons. For example, Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice) included 5 initial codes, namely \u0026ldquo;national education documents\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;chemistry curriculum standards\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;chemistry textbooks\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;how teachers design transdisciplinary courses\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;how students conduct transdisciplinary activities\u0026rdquo;. The former three initial codes belong to relevant literature and books, while the latter two initial codes are related to teachers\u0026rsquo; personal teaching experience. Therefore, we ultimately summarized two reasons for teachers\u0026rsquo; understandings of the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, namely \u0026ldquo;impacts of relevant books and literature\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;perceptions of own teaching experience\u0026rdquo;. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents all the initial codes and the reasons for 4 themes, which would be elaborated in \u0026ldquo;Results\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInitial codes and reasons for 4 themes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThemes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReasons\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInitial codes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eessential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eimpacts of relevant books and literature\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003enational education documents, chemistry curriculum standards, chemistry textbooks\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eperceptions of own teaching experience\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ehow teachers design transdisciplinary courses, how students conduct transdisciplinary activities\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003erelations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eequal status of various disciplines\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eno disparities between the importance of various disciplines, no excessive emphasis on a certain discipline\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ecognition of science teaching orientation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003escience teaching stresses applying knowledge to solve problems, science teaching cultivates students\u0026rsquo; ability by discovering and solving problems, the ultimate goal of learning scientific knowledge is to solve real-world problems\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eimpacts of own subject background\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003emore familiar with chemistry, the importance of chemistry\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003elimitations of own engineering knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eunfamiliar with engineering, not good at teaching engineering knowledge, engineering knowledge is difficult, difficult to deeply popularize engineering knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003evalues of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003estudent-based education concept\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ethe starting point of teaching is to cultivate students\u0026rsquo; ability and literacy, organize teaching activities according to students\u0026rsquo; developmental needs\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eviews on educational goals at different school stages\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ejunior high school is the initial stage, transdisciplinary practice of junior high school is not difficult, not easy to predict students\u0026rsquo; future development\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003efactors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eemphasis on subjective functions of students\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edevelop students\u0026rsquo; subjective initiative, stimulate students\u0026rsquo; interest, mobilize students\u0026rsquo; enthusiasm\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edecoupling of transdisciplinary practice from exam evaluation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edifficult to be evaluated by high school entrance examinations, selection purpose of examinations, importance of exam achievements, the pressure of admission\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eneeding support of high-quality curriculum resources and cases\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003elack of specific implementation plans, existing curriculum resources cannot be directly applied, difficult to develop high-quality transdisciplinary courses\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e To ensure the validity of interview outline, two experts in the field of chemistry education were invited to judge whether the questions are convenient for participants to answer. To ensure the trustworthiness of data analysis, three coders (the first three authors) independently analyzed and coded the data, and discussed different opinions to reach the consensus. Then, the verbatim transcripts and corresponding explanations and codes were returned to participants for confirmation to reflect their true beliefs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults of Questionnaire Survey\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eICTs\u0026rsquo; understandings of essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 shows the analysis results of Theme 1 (essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice), including 79 open codes, 5 axical codes, and 2 selective codes. The open codes whose frequency were over 10 are presented in Table 3, while those whose frequency were less than 10 are not presented in it, but their frequencies have been counted into the axical code which they belong to. Hence, in Table 3, the total frequency of open codes is less than that of axical codes. Since each teacher generally mentioned more than one code, the total frequency of all codes (1018) exceeded the number of participants (241).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3\u003c/strong\u003e Analysis results of Theme 1\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"627\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelective codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAxical codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOpen codes (frequency over 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edisciplinary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(350)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edisciplinary connections (308)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eknowledge integration (99), connections between different disciplines (58), multidisciplinary (28), interdisciplinary (24), connections between chemistry and other disciplines (11), knowledge system (10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eknowledge application (42)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eemphasis on knowledge application (35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epedagogical\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(668)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eproblem solving\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(97)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ereal problem scenarios (53), solve real-world problems (39) \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecurriculum design\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(292)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003einnovative design of courses (48), connected to real life (46), the diversity of teaching activities (42), feasibility (16), connected to social production (11), student-centered teaching (10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003elearning activities\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(279)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epractical activities (93), comprehensive learning (63), inquiry activities (59), openness and flexibility of classroom activities (29), interesting (20), problem-oriented learning (16), collaborative learning (13), experimental activities (12)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote:\u003c/em\u003e the number in parentheses indicates the frequency of each code, namely the number of times mentioned by participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt can be seen that in-service chemistry teachers understood the connotation of transdisciplinary practice from disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives. In terms of the disciplinary perspective, almost all teachers mentioned the aspect of disciplinary connections (e.g., knowledge integration, connections between different disciplines). Whereas, only less than 20% of them mentioned the aspect of knowledge application (e.g., emphasis on knowledge application, comprehensive apply knowledge). Turning to the pedagogical perspective, most teachers touched upon the aspects of curriculum design (e.g., innovative design of courses, connected to real life) and learning activities (e.g., practical activities, inquiry activities). Moreover, only about 40% of participants emphasized the aspect of problem solving (e.g., real problem scenarios, solve real-world problems).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGiven that the frequency percentages of disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives were respectively at 34.4% and 65.6% (N=1018), we believed that chemistry teachers were more inclined to describe the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective. A further comparison revealed that the aspects of disciplinary connections and learning activities (respectively with a frequency of 308 and 279) were mentioned by teachers much more frequently than problem solving and knowledge application (respectively with a frequency of 97 and 42). Thus, we deemed that chemistry teachers to some extent failed to fully understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eICTs\u0026rsquo; representations of relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 displays the analysis results of Theme 2 (relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice), including the frequencies and percentages of seven \u0026nbsp;subject relation representation graphs. Since each teacher could choose no more than 3 graphs which they agreed with, the total frequency of seven graphs (665) was less than three times the number of participants (241).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4\u003c/strong\u003e Analysis results of Theme 2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"577\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubject relation representation graph\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentage\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eintegrated\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e197\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e81.74%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eemphasis on practical application and problem solving\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e194\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80.50%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003echemistry as the leading subject\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e108\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.81%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eemphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.90%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eemphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.75%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eengineering as context\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.69%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eindependent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.54%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong seven types of graphs, in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with the \u0026ldquo;integrated\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;emphasis on practical application and problem solving\u0026rdquo;, whose frequencies were over 80%. Besides, participants somewhat agreed with \u0026ldquo;chemistry as the leading subject\u0026rdquo;, whose frequency percentage was about half of that of the former two graphs. However, only less than 25% of participants recognized \u0026ldquo;emphasis on academic subject knowledge teaching\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design\u0026rdquo;. The lowest recognition was due to \u0026ldquo;engineering as context\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;independent\u0026rdquo;, whose frequencies were about 10%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn view of the higher frequencies of \u0026ldquo;integrated\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;emphasis on practical application and problem solving\u0026rdquo;, we considered that when representing the relationship between various disciplines, chemistry teachers paid more attention to disciplinary knowledge integration and real-world problems solving. Plus, they could realize the importance of chemistry, believing that transdisciplinary practice in chemistry curriculum should be led by chemistry. However, they had a lower recognition of engineering itself.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eICTs\u0026rsquo; descriptions of values of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5 shows the analysis results of Theme 3 (values of transdisciplinary practice), including 83 open codes, 8 axical codes, and 3 selective codes (i.e., student development, education development, and national development). As for student development, its open codes whose frequency were over 10 are presented in Table 4, while those whose frequency were less than 10 are not presented in it, but their frequencies have been counted. Thus, in Table 5, the total frequency of open codes is less than that of the selective code (i.e., student development). Whereas, the frequencies of open codes which belong to other two selective codes were much smaller, so it may be more suitable to present them in Table 5. Thus, the total frequency of open codes is equal to that of corresponding selective codes (i.e., education development and national development). Since each teacher generally mentioned more than one code, the total frequency of all open codes (860) exceeded the number of participants (241).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAnalysis results of Theme 3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"612\" class=\"fr-table-selection-hover\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19.9346%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelective codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAxical codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOpen codes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 19.9346%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003estudent development (802)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eability cultivation (386)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003einnovative skills (98), problem-solving skills (61), collaborative skills (50), comprehensive\u0026nbsp;ability\u0026nbsp;(43), ability to apply knowledge (33), practical skills (31), hands-on skills (28), scientific inquiry skills (15), communication skills (10)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecognitive development (161)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edeep understand subject knowledge (31), broaden horizons (26), divergent thinking (18), broaden the scope of knowledge (14), comprehensive thinking (14), integrate knowledge (10), knowledge transfer and association (10)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eliteracy improvement (124)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecomprehensive literacy (57), all-round development (26), chemistry core literacy (23), scientific literacy (10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eattitudes and responsibility (131)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003estimulate learning interest and motivation (74), social responsibility (16), adapt to the needs of social development (14)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 19.9346%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eeducation development\u0026nbsp;(30)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ediscipline construction\u0026nbsp;(4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epromote exchange and cooperation between disciplines (2), improve the level of disciplinary integration (1), promote discipline construction (1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eeducation quality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(26)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eimprove teaching abilities (11), improve learning effectiveness (9),\u0026nbsp;optimize teaching resources (1), promote curriculum reform (1), promote quality-oriented education (1),\u0026nbsp;improve teaching efficiency (1), improve teachers\u0026rsquo; professional literacy (1),\u0026nbsp;promote school progress (1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 19.9346%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003enational development (28)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etalent cultivation\u0026nbsp;(16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecomprehensive talents (5), innovative talents (4), scientific and technological talents (2), diversified talents (2), transdisciplinary talents (1), practical talents (1), compound talents (1)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.9543%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003esocial progress\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(12)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003esocial sustainable development (4), promote social development, (3) promote science and technology advancement (2), improve civic literacy (1), solve industrial problems (1), protect the environment (1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is indicated that almost all teachers focused on the contributions of transdisciplinary practice to student development, with an overwhelming frequency proportion of 93.3%. They generally provided explanations from the aspects of ability cultivation (e.g., innovative skills, problem-solving skills), cognitive development (e.g., deep understand subject knowledge, broaden the scope of knowledge), literacy improvement (e.g., comprehensive literacy, chemistry core literacy), and attitudes and responsibility (e.g., stimulate learning interest and motivation, social responsibility).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome teachers described the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of education development, with a frequency proportion of 3.5%. They explained from the aspects of discipline construction (e.g., promote exchange and cooperation between disciplines, improve the level of disciplinary integration) and education quality (e.g., improve teaching abilities, promote curriculum reform). Additionally, other teachers described its values from the perspective of national development, whose frequency proportion was 3.2%. They mainly provided explanations from the aspects of talent cultivation (e.g., comprehensive talents, innovative talents) and social progress (e.g., social sustainable development, promote science and technology advancement).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsidering that the frequency of student development (802) was far more than that of education development and national development (58), we came to the conclusion that chemistry teachers showed an incomprehensive understanding about the values of transdisciplinary practice, because they mainly focused on its impacts on student development, but almost neglected its impacts on education development and national development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eICTs\u0026rsquo; perceptions of factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6 displays the analysis results of Theme 4 (factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation), including favorable and unfavorable factors. These factors generally had high scores (the average score of each item was between 3.81 and 4.67), which indicated that in-service chemistry teachers believed the implementation of transdisciplinary practice is faced with various opportunities and challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6\u003c/strong\u003e Analysis results of Theme 4\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"544\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCategory of factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAverage score of each construct\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efavorable factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003einternal factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eexternal factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003estudent factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eunfavorable factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003einternal factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eexternal factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003estudent factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn terms of favorable factors, variance analysis revealed a significant difference among the scores of three constructs (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e=10.262, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e＜0.05). A further pairwise comparisons showed that the score of student factors was significantly higher than that of internal or external factors, while there was no significant difference between internal and external factors. That is to say, compared to internal and external factors, chemistry teachers believed that student factors (i.e., students\u0026rsquo; cooperation and support, effective teamwork, students\u0026rsquo; interest) can more effectively promote the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTurning to unfavorable factors, variance analysis indicated a significant difference among the scores of three constructs (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e=5.977, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e＜0.05). A further pairwise comparisons revealed that the score of external factors was significantly higher than that of internal or student factors, while no significant difference was found between internal and student factors. In other words, compared to internal and student factors, chemistry teachers considered that external factors (i.e., lack of transdisciplinary course resources, the score-oriented evaluation system, the pressure of senior high school entrance examinations, limited teaching hours) would greatly hinder the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo sum up, chemistry teachers thought positive student factors (such as students\u0026rsquo; cooperation and support, and students\u0026rsquo; interest) are more conducive to implementing transdisciplinary practice, while external challenges (such as lack of transdisciplinary course resources, and score-oriented evaluation systems) may cause great difficulties to implement transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFindings of In-depth Interview\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReasons for ICTs\u0026rsquo; understandings of essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of survey indicated that in-service chemistry teachers tended to understand the characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from a pedagogical perspective (e.g., real problem scenarios, innovative design of courses, practical activities). Two main reasons were revealed by the in-depth interview. The first reason is the impacts of relevant books and literature. For illustration, T1 stated that \u003cem\u003emy provincial-level research project is related to transdisciplinary practice. When applying for it, I read national education documents, chemistry curriculum standards and textbooks, and learned about requirements for student development in basic education, such as developing problem-solving skills, scientific inquiry skills, and innovation skills.\u003c/em\u003e The second reason is teachers\u0026rsquo; perceptions of own teaching experience. For example, T6 said that \u003cem\u003ewhen organizing transdisciplinary teaching, I create a real and specific problem scenario to stimulate students\u0026rsquo; interest; the scenario comes from daily life or social production, but cannot be too limited, which encourages students to propose multiple solutions by conducting practical activities.\u003c/em\u003e Similarly, other interviewees also explained their opinions based on teaching experience, which seems to be the main source of their definitions of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReasons for ICTs\u0026rsquo; representations of relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of in-depth interview explained why in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with \u0026ldquo;integrated\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;emphasis on practical application and problem solving\u0026rdquo; when representing relations between various disciplines. Teachers\u0026rsquo; recognition of \u0026ldquo;integrated\u0026rdquo; stems from their emphasis on the equal status of various disciplines. For instance, T5 explained that \u003cem\u003ewe should not overly emphasize one or two subjects, which may limit students\u0026rsquo; thinking.\u003c/em\u003e Teachers\u0026rsquo; recognition of \u0026ldquo;emphasis on practical application and problem solving\u0026rdquo; comes from their cognition of science teaching orientation. T4 noted that \u003cem\u003ethe ultimate goal of learning scientific knowledge is to solve real-world problems, and science teaching focuses on cultivating students\u0026rsquo; key abilities in the process of discovering and solving problems.\u003c/em\u003e T4 believed science teaching aims to cultivate students\u0026rsquo; problem-solving skills. In addition, teachers somewhat agreed with \u0026ldquo;chemistry as the leading subject\u0026rdquo;, which is mainly because of their own subject background. For illustration, T3 argued that\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;I am more familiar with chemistry compared to other fields, so the transdisciplinary knowledge I can impart to students is definitely centered around chemistry.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn-depth interview also explained why few in-service chemistry teachers prioritized \u0026ldquo;emphasis on chemistry teaching and engineering design\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;engineering as context\u0026rdquo;. Taken as an example, T2 said that \u003cem\u003emost middle school teachers are unfamiliar with engineering, and I am not clear about its definition; in the teaching process, I do not want to involve too much in areas that I am not very good at, which causes difficulties for me to coordinate the pace of classroom teaching.\u003c/em\u003e It can be seen that teachers\u0026rsquo; low recognition of engineering is mainly due to their limited engineering knowledge.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReasons for ICTs\u0026rsquo; descriptions of values of transdisciplinary practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey suggested that in-service chemistry teachers tended to describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of student development (e.g., innovative skills, problem-solving skills, collaborative skills). For illustration, T3 argued that \u003cem\u003eI set teaching goals and organize teaching activities based on students\u0026rsquo; developmental needs; when completing transdisciplinary tasks, students comprehensively apply knowledge to solve problems, thereby enhancing problem-solving skills; students actively think and collaborate to seek solutions, thereby cultivating innovative skills and collaborative skills.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eOther interviewees also provided explanations based on the student-based education concept, which is the main reason for their conceptions about the values of transdisciplinary practice.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, although the interviewed participants did not describe the values of transdisciplinary practice from the perspective of national development when answering the questionnaire, they indeed agreed with this viewpoint when receiving interviews. However, they still held reservations about the aspect of talent cultivation, mainly due to their views on educational goals at different school stages. For example, T1 explained that \u003cem\u003estudents have limited knowledge in the basic education stage; they only can solve simple problems, and have troubles in solving complex problems from social production; transdisciplinary activities in junior high schools are not too difficult, and just play a guiding role; whether students can eventually become innovative talents depends on whether they can receive relevant training in the future (such as in higher education or workplace).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReasons for ICTs\u0026rsquo; perceptions of factors affecting transdisciplinary practice implementation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn-service chemistry teachers believed that student factors (e.g., students\u0026rsquo; interest and effective teamwork) can promote transdisciplinary implementation more greatly. The main reason revealed by in-depth interview is that they emphasized on the subjective functions of students. For illustration, T5 deemed that \u003cem\u003ewe should develop students\u0026rsquo; subjective initiative and stimulate students\u0026rsquo; interest, so that they are willing to invest more time and energy, thus improving the efficiency of transdisciplinary practice implementation.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTeachers were concerned that external factors (e.g., score-oriented evaluation systems, pressure of senior high school entrance examinations) may cause great difficulties to implement transdisciplinary practice. This is mainly because the fact that transdisciplinary practice is decoupled from exam evaluation. For instance, T4 noted that \u003cem\u003ealthough new curriculum standards have clearly required the implementation of transdisciplinary practice, we realize that high school entrance examination papers cannot evaluate students\u0026rsquo; transdisciplinary ability and literacy; in the context of exam-oriented education, we usually attach more importance to the acquisition of subject knowledge.\u003c/em\u003e Thus, it is easy to see that exam-oriented education ideas has deeply rooted, and caused a series of consequences (including traditional evaluation systems, pressure of admission, limited teaching hours), which exert negative impacts on the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, teachers believed that transdisciplinary practice implementation may be hindered by the lack of transdisciplinary course resources and materials, which is mainly because they need support of external high-quality curriculum resources and cases. For example, T6 pointed out that \u003cem\u003enew textbooks only simply lists the teaching goals of transdisciplinary practice, but lacks specific implementation plans (such as specific teaching materials and curriculum design); it is difficult to find feasible high-quality teaching cases online\u003c/em\u003e. Hence, it is indicated that the lack of specific and feasible transdisciplinary cases and high-quality transdisciplinary courses would greatly hinder the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions and Discussions","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, a questionnaire survey and in-depth interview were conducted to explore in-service chemistry teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and the reasons. The key findings are concluded in Figure 4. They did not fully understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice, mentioning more about subject connection and learning activities, but less about problem solving and knowledge application; they tended to define transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective, which was mainly due to impacts of books and literature and perceptions of teaching experience. When representing relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, they generally agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving, owing to their emphasis on equal status of various disciplines and their cognition of science teaching orientation; they emphasized chemistry but neglected engineering, because of their subject background and limited engineering knowledge. They described the values of transdisciplinary practice incomprehensively, because they focused on student development based on the student-based education concept, but more or less neglected national development based on their views on educational goals at different school stages. They believed transdisciplinary practice implementation can be promoted by student factors (such as students\u0026rsquo; interest), given the subjective functions of students; it is also faced with some external challenges (such as insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems), due to the lack of high-quality curriculum resources and the decoupling of transdisciplinary practice from exam evaluation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn-service chemistry teachers tended to understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective (influenced by relevant documents and teaching experience). Some studies also revealed that teachers tended to define STEM education from a pedagogical perspective (Radloff \u0026amp; Guzey, 2016; Yilmazoglu, 2024), while others found that teachers defined it from a disciplinary perspective (EL-Deghaidy et al., 2017; Kececi, 2023). Combined with the findings of this study, it can be inferred that differences in the way essential characteristics are stated in education documents may lead teachers to provide definitions from different perspectives. Furthermore, almost all participants mentioned disciplinary connections and learning activities, while less of them mentioned problem solving and knowledge application. However, the connotation of transdisciplinary practice in Chinese chemistry education involves integrating and applying multidisciplinary knowledge and skills, solving real-world problems, and conducting practical activities. Based on the levels of STEM integration (Vasquez et al., 2013), we found that the majority of participants only understood transdisciplinary practice from the interdisciplinary level, not up to the transdisciplinary level. It can be seen that they superficially understood the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice. The potential reason may be that teachers only defined transdisciplinary practice based on its literal meaning. Specifically, it is easy for participants to associate \u0026ldquo;transdisciplinary\u0026rdquo; with knowledge integration and multidisciplinary (belong to discipline connections), and to associate \u0026ldquo;practice\u0026rdquo; with practical activities (belong to learning activities). Whereas, problem solving and knowledge application need to be further explored by them, going beyond the literal meaning of \u0026ldquo;transdisciplinary practice\u0026rdquo;.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen representing relations between various disciplines in transdisciplinary practice, in-service chemistry teachers most agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving. Previous research also revealed similar findings: teachers argued that STEM disciplines are interrelated (Guler et al., 2017); teachers attached importance to solving real-world problems (Dare et al., 2019). What\u0026rsquo;s more, in-service chemistry teachers tended to endow various disciplines with different degrees of importance. Similarly, in the study of Dare et al. (2019), teachers paid more attention to science than engineering. Among 141 papers presented at the 2014 STEM conference in Vancouver, 45% were devoted to science, but only 9% to engineering (English, 2016). In this study, in-service chemistry teachers stressed the role of chemistry (due to their subject background), but less valued engineering (due to their limited engineering knowledge). Other research also found that teachers held misunderstandings of engineering (Bagiati \u0026amp; Evangelou, 2015), had troubles in integrating engineering (Lau \u0026amp; Multani, 2018), and were not confident in teaching engineering (Smith et al., 2015). It seems to be a common problem. The potential reasons may be that teachers think engineering knowledge is too complex for middle students to grasp; engineering knowledge is not much correlated with examinations, which weakens the emphasis laid on engineering.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen describing the values of transdisciplinary practice, in-service chemistry teachers focused on its contributions to student development, which stemmed from the student-based education concept. This is closely related to the fact that in China, the instructional mode is shifting from teacher-centered towards student-centered in recent years (Authors, 2015). Specifically, teachers generally design teaching goals and organize teaching activities according to students\u0026rsquo; developmental needs, so students should achieve improvement after completing transdisciplinary learning. Meanwhile, in-service chemistry teachers more or less neglected its contributions to national development. It can be seen that they incomprehensively understood the values of transdisciplinary practice. The main reason is that participants believed transdisciplinary practice in basic education stage is just an initial step to achieve the goals of cultivating national talents. Other research also revealed similar results. For example, in the study of Yildirim (2021), when describing the importance of STEM education, all teachers focused exclusively its impact on student development, but completely neglected national development. For another example, in the study of Ciftci et al. (2022), teachers were required to describe the contributions of STEM education. The frequency of student development accounted for a dominating percentage, while only 0.74% was due to national development. Hence, we assumed that it is a common phenomenon for teachers to perceive the values of transdisciplinary practice (or STEM education).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen judging the impacts of various factors on transdisciplinary practice implementation, in-service chemistry teachers believed that positive student factors (e.g., students\u0026rsquo; interest) are more effective in promoting its implementation. This is mainly because they lay emphasis on the subjective functions of students in education practice, and view students as active discoverers and explorers (Lin, et al., 2003). It is easy to understand that if students are interested in transdisciplinary practice, they will actively participate in transdisciplinary activities, thus facilitating its implementation. What\u0026rsquo;s more, in-service chemistry teachers were worried that transdisciplinary practice implementation is faced with two external challenges, namely insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems. These findings could be explained by Chinese education context. First, transdisciplinary practice is a new education concept in China, and not all teachers can thoroughly understand it. Most teachers are accustomed to the subject-based teaching and are not good at integrating other subjects, so it is difficult for them to develop high-quality transdisciplinary courses. Second, \u0026ldquo;culture of examination\u0026rdquo; is prevalent in China, and the education system is dominated by high-stakes exams (Gu, 2004), such as high school entrance examinations and college entrance examinations. These high-stakes exams are in the form of paper-and-pencil tests, which are difficult to evaluate students\u0026rsquo; performance in transdisciplinary practice (Chang \u0026amp; Chen, 2023). In such case, schools and teachers may pay less attention to transdisciplinary practice, which is bound to have a negative effect on its implementation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study is unique in that it inspected how in-service teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice within the context of a chemistry curriculum reform, and further figured out the reasons why they held corresponding conceptions, which addressed existing research gaps. Meanwhile, the research instruments developed in this study have been verified by empirical data to be reliable and valid, which can be further adapted to explore the conceptions about transdisciplinary practice held by teachers from different subjects (such as physics and biology). Therefore, we believed that our research has made some contributions to the fields of science education and teacher education.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImplications and Limitations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo improve in-service chemistry teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice, we provided the following suggestions. First, seminars on transdisciplinary practice should be conducted among teachers to elaborate its essential characteristics and social values in more details. On one hand, combining the contents of chemistry curriculum standards with the levels of STEM integration, teachers can realize that transdisciplinary practice involves applying multidisciplinary knowledge and skills, solving real-world problems, and shaping learning experience (or conducting practical activities). On the other hand, based on national education documents, teachers can understand that transdisciplinary practice is conducive to addressing global challenges (such as energy crisis and climate change), cultivating high-end talents (such as innovative talents and practical talents), and enhancing economic development and national competitiveness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecond, attention should be paid to engineering education and improve teachers\u0026rsquo; ability and confidence in engineering integration. On one hand, in China, engineering education is often neglected in basic education. When arranging courses for basic education, it is necessary to improve the proportion of engineering knowledge and develop engineering integration courses (such as chemical engineering and biological engineering), which can provide support not only for teachers to teach engineering, but also for students to cultivate engineering thinking. On the other hand, it is critical to offer teachers opportunities to participate in engineering professional development. Experts can be invited to popularize engineering knowledge to teachers, and teachers can receive training on how to design engineering-based courses.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, measures should be taken to reduce the external challenges of implementing transdisciplinary practice, especially about insufficient curriculum resources and inappropriate evaluation systems. On one hand, learning communities on transdisciplinary practice can be established for teachers to regularly share curriculum resources; experts had better design high-quality transdisciplinary courses, including determining learning objectives and designing learning activities, so as to reduce the difficulty for teachers to develop transdisciplinary curriculum by themselves. On the hand, it is crucial to adopt a scientific and reasonable evaluation system. Process evaluation should be applied to assess students\u0026rsquo; performance in transdisciplinary activities, including engineering design, innovative thinking, problem solving, cooperation and communication, etc. In light of the international tendency towards\u0026nbsp;transdisciplinary\u0026nbsp;education, we believed that above suggestions are not only applicable to China, but also to other countries or regions, especially where transdisciplinary education is just emerging.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite some theoretical and practical implications discussed above, there are some limitations in our research. Firstly, the participants of this study are from a province, with well-developed economy and education. Whereas, the attention paid to transdisciplinary practice and the status of transdisciplinary practice implementation usually vary across different regions, so it would be very cautious to generalize the results of this study to other regions or countries. Secondly, the researchers inevitably have an effect on the interview process. But we have taken some measures to minimize it. For instance, researchers were prohibited to commenting participants\u0026rsquo; opinions when collecting data. Thirdly, although we have provided some explanations for the findings, due the limited number of interviewees, some problems have yet to be deeply explored. For example, few participants described the impacts of transdisciplinary practice on national development when answering the questionnaire, despite they somewhat agreed with this viewpoint when being interviewed.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe express great expectations for enriching research on transdisciplinary practice. Above all, it is well-known that different science subjects have distinct inherent characteristics (Erduran \u0026amp; Dagher, 2014). Our research tools can be adapted and applied by future studies to explore teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions about transdisciplinary practice or STEM education, within the specific context of another subject (e.g., physics and biology), thus figuring out the similarities and differences. In addition, given the fact that teachers\u0026rsquo; beliefs can\u0026nbsp;influence their implementation of curriculum reform (Sun \u0026amp; Zhang, 2024),\u0026nbsp;future research can further explore the relations between teachers\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;conceptions about transdisciplinary practice and implementation of it, such as how\u0026nbsp;teachers\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;conceptions\u0026nbsp;affect their\u0026nbsp;implementation\u0026nbsp;of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to individual privacy, but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was sponsored by Education Science “14th Five-Year Plan” Key Program of Jiangsu Province (B-b/2024/01/195).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the School of Teacher Education, Nantong University, on June 20, 2024 (Approval number: 20240601). The approval covered the design, data collection, and analysis procedures of the study involving human participants. All research procedures were conducted in accordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained in writing from all participants before data collection. Participants were informed of the research purpose, their right to withdraw without penalty, and how their data would be used. Consent was obtained in September 2024 by the first author. Participants were assured that their data would remain anonymous and confidential. They were informed that the data would be used solely for academic purposes and that no identifiable information would be disclosed or published. All participants explicitly consented to the use of anonymized quotes in publication.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors. (2015).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAl Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., \u0026amp; Miranda M. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers\u0026rsquo; attitudes toward transdisciplinary STEM teaching. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27\u003c/em\u003e(1), 63\u0026ndash;88.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBagiati, A., \u0026amp; Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher\u0026rsquo;s experience. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23\u003c/em\u003e(1), 112\u0026ndash;128.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang, C. C., \u0026amp; Chen, Y. K. (2023). A transdisciplinary STEM course integrated through project-based learning on robotics: perspective from teacher and student feedback. \u003cem\u003eAsia Pacific Journal of Education\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2209698\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCharmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin, \u0026amp; Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eHandbook of qualitative research\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed., pp. 509\u0026ndash;535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCiftci, A., Topcu, M. S., \u0026amp; Foulk, J. A. (2022). Pre-service early childhood teachers\u0026rsquo; views on STEM education and their STEM teaching practices. \u003cem\u003eResearch in Science \u0026amp; Technological Education, 40\u003c/em\u003e(2), 207\u0026ndash;233.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCreswell, J. W., \u0026amp; Poth, C. N. (2018). \u003cem\u003eQualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches\u003c/em\u003e (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDaneshpour, H., \u0026amp; Kwegyir-Aful, E. (2022). Analysing transdisciplinary education: A scoping review, \u003cem\u003eScience \u0026amp; Education, 31\u003c/em\u003e, 1047\u0026ndash;1074.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E. A., \u0026amp; Roehrig, G. H. (2019). Creating a continuum of STEM models: Exploring how K-12 science teachers conceptualize STEM education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science Education, 41\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDong, Y., Wang, J., Yang, Y., \u0026amp; Kurup, P. M. (2020). Understanding intrinsic challenges to stem instructional practices for Chinese teachers based on their beliefs and knowledge base, \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of STEM education, 7\u003c/em\u003e(1), 47\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEl-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M., \u0026amp; Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in schools: Views from in-service science teachers. \u003cem\u003eEurasia Journal of Mathematics Science \u0026amp; Technology Education, 13\u003c/em\u003e(6), 2459\u0026ndash;2484.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEnglish, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of STEM Education, 3\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eErduran, S., \u0026amp; Dagher Z, (2014). \u003cem\u003eReconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories\u003c/em\u003e. Dordrecht: Springer.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlavian, H. (2024). \u003cem\u003eTransdisciplinary teaching in inclusive schools: Promoting transdisciplinary education for learners with special needs\u003c/em\u003e. Dordrecht: Springer.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGiamellaro, M., Ewing, B., \u0026amp; Siegel, D. (2025). Affordances and constraints to implementing project-based STEM: A case study of systemic school change. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23\u003c/em\u003e(3), 849\u0026ndash;869.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGlaser, B. G., \u0026amp; Strauss, A. (1967). \u003cem\u003eThe discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research\u003c/em\u003e. Chicago, IL: Adline.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuler, F., Cakiroglu, J., \u0026amp; Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2017). Pre-service science teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of STEM education, In: \u003cem\u003eEducational Conference on Education Research\u003c/em\u003e, Kopenhagen, Denmark.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGu, M. (2004). \u003cem\u003eThe cultural foundation to the Chinese education\u003c/em\u003e. Taiyuan: Shanxi Education Press (in Chinese).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHackman, S. T., Zhang, D., \u0026amp; He, J. (2021). Secondary school science teachers\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards STEM education in Liberia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science Education, 43\u003c/em\u003e(2), 223\u0026ndash;246.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHamad, S., Tairab, H., Wardat, Y., Rabbani, L., Alarabi, K., Yousif, M., Abu-Al-Aishet, A., \u0026amp; Stoica, G. (2022). Understanding science teachers\u0026rsquo; implementations of integrated STEM: Teacher perceptions and practice. \u003cem\u003eSustainability, 14\u003c/em\u003e(6), 3594\u0026ndash;3612.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHoney, M., Pearson, G., \u0026amp; Schweingruber, H. (2014). \u003cem\u003eSTEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research\u003c/em\u003e. Washington, D C: National Academies Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu, J., \u0026amp; Zhang, K. (2022). Interpretation of chemistry curriculum standards of compulsory education (the 2022 version): Transdisciplinary practice. \u003cem\u003eChinese Journal of Chemical education, 43\u003c/em\u003e(15), 13\u0026ndash;18. (in Chinese).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu, Y., Guo, K., \u0026amp; Li, J. (2024). The ontology, epistemology, and axiology of STEM education. \u003cem\u003eChinese Journal of Chemical education, 45\u003c/em\u003e(1), 15\u0026ndash;19. (in Chinese).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKececi, G. (2023). Determining pre-service science teachers\u0026rsquo; understanding about STEM education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Baltic Science Education, 22\u003c/em\u003e(5), 833\u0026ndash;850.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLau, M., \u0026amp; Multani, S. (2018). Engineering STEM teacher learning: using a museum-based field experience to foster STEM teachers\u0026rsquo; pedagogical content knowledge for engineering. In: Uzzo S., Graves S., E. Shay, M. Harford, \u0026amp; R. Thompson (Eds.), \u003cem\u003ePedagogical content knowledge in STEM: research to practice\u003c/em\u003e (pp.195\u0026ndash;213). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97475-0_11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLin, C., Yang, Z., \u0026amp; Huang, X. (2003). \u003cem\u003eDictionary of psychology (Volume 1)\u003c/em\u003e. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press (in Chinese).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaambo, C. M. (2023). \u003cem\u003eKey stakeholders\u0026rsquo; perceptions of STEM education in Zambia: A mixed methods inquiry\u003c/em\u003e. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Chicago, Loyyola University.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinistry of Education [MoE]. (2022). \u003cem\u003eThe chemistry curriculum standards of compulsory education (the 2022 version)\u003c/em\u003e. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press (in Chinese).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNational Science Board [NSB]. (2007). \u003cem\u003eNational Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education System\u003c/em\u003e. Virginia: National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsb07114/nsb07114.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNunnally, J. (1978). \u003cem\u003ePsychometric methods\u003c/em\u003e. New York: McGraw.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePatton, M. Q. (2015). \u003cem\u003eQualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice\u003c/em\u003e (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRadloff, J., \u0026amp; Guzey, S. (2016). Investigating preservice STEM teacher conceptions of STEM education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Science Education \u0026amp; Technology, 25\u003c/em\u003e(5), 759\u0026ndash;774.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith, K. L., Rayfield, J., \u0026amp; McKim, B. R. (2015). Effective practices in STEM integration: Describing teacher perceptions and instructional method use. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agricultural Education, 56\u003c/em\u003e(4), 182\u0026ndash;201.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSun, D., \u0026amp; Zhang, Q. (2024). Evolution of teachers\u0026rsquo; teaching beliefs about mathematics in a teacher education program. \u003cem\u003eBehavioral Sciences, 14\u003c/em\u003e(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100934\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThe White House, (2018), \u003cem\u003eCharting a Course for Success: America\u0026rsquo;s strategy for STEM education\u003c/em\u003e, from https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVasquez, J., Sneider, C., \u0026amp; Comer, M. (2013). \u003cem\u003eSTEM lesson essentials, grades 3\u0026ndash;8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics\u003c/em\u003e. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYildirim, B. (2021). Preschool STEM activities: preschool teachers\u0026rsquo; preparation and views. \u003cem\u003eEarly Childhood Education Journal, 49\u003c/em\u003e(2), 149\u0026ndash;162.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYilmazoglu, E. (2024). \u003cem\u003eThe role of engineering design-based instruction on pre-service chemistry teachers\u0026rsquo; STEM conceptions and self-regulation\u003c/em\u003e. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ankara, Middle East Technical University.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Transdisciplinary practice, In-service chemistry teachers, STEM education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe curriculum reform of science education is shifting towards transdisciplinary approaches. This study aimed to investigate how chemistry teachers conceptualized transdisciplinary practice in the era of curriculum reform. The theoretical framework included essential characteristics, discipline relations, values, influencing factors of transdisciplinary practice. Participants consisted of 241 Chinese in-service chemistry teachers. A questionnaire survey and an in-depth interview were conducted to explore their conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the reasons. The findings indicated that they tended to understand the essential characteristics of transdisciplinary practice from the pedagogical perspective, but not completely up to the transdisciplinary level; when representing the relations between various disciplines, they agreed with disciplinary integration and problem solving, stressed the role of chemistry, but less valued engineering; they incomprehensively described the values of transdisciplinary practice, mainly focusing on its contributions to student development; they believed transdisciplinary practice implementation can be effectively promoted by positive student factors, but it is faced with great external challenges. The reasons for their conceptions stemmed from relevant documents, own subject background, views on educational goals, decoupling from exam evaluation, etc. These results suggest that more measures need to be taken to improve teachers\u0026rsquo; conceptions of transdisciplinary practice and the implementation of transdisciplinary practice.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Investigating In-service Chemistry Teachers’ Conceptions about Transdisciplinary Practice in the Era of Curriculum Reform","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-17 04:56:51","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7105763/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"316c23ce-bad5-41a1-a519-3774c8f08691","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 17th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":54666646,"name":"Social science/Education"},{"id":54666647,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":54666648,"name":"Social science/Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-18T05:55:03+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-17 04:56:51","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7105763","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7105763","identity":"rs-7105763","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}