The axiological foundations of innovation in STEM education - A systematic review and ethical meta-analysis.

Introduction: Values are crucial in decision-making, including processes related to science and technology, despite scientists often being unaware of them. Because a goal of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is to foster innovation, values have become fundamental in directing science and technology policies and shaping organizational cultures to leverage innovation. However, most research on STEM education has focused on improving performance or access to STEM education while overlooking its axiological configuration. This study analyzes the different value systems emerging in the current literature on STEM higher education and identifies the relevant stakeholders. Method: In this systematic review and ethical meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the most prominent studies on STEM education and its core values. We followed a Ricoeur-inspired hermeneutical methodology using Atlas ti 8.4.4. Values are identified and classified using a systematic approach to integrate axiological landscapes. Results: The literature does not explicitly discuss the value of STEM education for innovation. However, social values appear to be at the intersection and the cornerstone of basic, economic, aesthetic, and epistemic values, as most social values also manifest these four systems. The most common manifestation of the value system is the capability approach to justice, followed by the beauty of recognition and success and, in third place, racism and social disparities. The analyzed literature emphasizes STEM education's social, political, and economic determinants. However, there is an epistemic gap in the indispensable value of innovating and assessing STEM education. Conclusions: We propose an organizational culture model for STEM education that considers the goals, ends, values, and behaviors of students, teachers, educational institutions, and the government. This model can help fill the axiological gaps in STEM education.

Promoting networks between evidence-based medicine and values-based medicine in continuing medical education.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, medical practice has followed two different paradigms: evidence-based medicine (EBM) and values-based medicine (VBM). There is an urgent need to promote medical education that strengthens the relationship between these two paradigms. This work is designed to establish the foundations for a continuing medical education (CME) program aimed at encouraging the dialogue between EBM and VBM by determining the values relevant to everyday medical activities. METHODS: A quasi-experimental, observational, comparative, prospective and qualitative study was conducted by analyzing through a concurrent triangulation strategy the correlation between healthcare personnel-patient relationship, healthcare personnel's life history, and ethical judgments regarding dilemmas that arise in daily clinical practice.In 2009, healthcare personnel working in Mexico were invited to participate in a free, online clinical ethics course. Each participant responded to a set of online survey instruments before and after the CME program. Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare personnel, focusing on their views and representations of clinical practice. RESULTS: The healthcare personnel's core values were honesty and respect. There were significant differences in the clinical practice axiology before and after the course (P <0.001); notably, autonomy climbed from the 10th (order mean (OM) = 8.00) to the 3rd position (OM = 5.86). In ethical discernment, the CME program had an impact on autonomy (P ≤0.0001). Utilitarian autonomy was reinforced in the participants (P ≤0.0001). Regarding work values, significant differences due to the CME intervention were found in openness to change (OC) (P <0.000), self-transcendence (ST) (P <0.001), and self-enhancement (SE) (P <0.019). Predominant values in life history, ethical discernment and healthcare personnel-patient relation were beneficence, respect and compassion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare personnel participating in a CME intervention in clinical ethics improved high-order values: Openness to change (OC) and Self Transcendence (ST), which are essential to fulfilling the healing ends of medicine. The CME intervention strengthened the role of educators and advisors with respect to healthcare personnel. The ethical values developed by healthcare professionals arise from their life history and their professional formation.