Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of

Blended Learning Models

Kārlis Greitāns

, Ģirts Burgmanis

and Dace Namsone

Faculty of Science and Technology (Interdisciplinary Center for Educational Innovation), University of Latvia,

O.Vācieša iela 4, Rīga, Latvija

Keywords: Blended Learning Models, Digital Transformation, STEM Literacy.

Abstract: This paper explores the necessity for an operational typology of blended learning models in science education,

emphasizing the significant role of the digital dimension in the traditional didactic triangle of learner, teacher,

and curriculum. We propose the Framework for Primary Science Curriculum in the Digital Age, which

considers existing student digital experiences in STEM and the necessities of the digital age. Further, we

approach the Framework for Primary Science Curriculum in the Digital Age from student and teacher

perspective, by illustrating aspects that become more important than others in student learning and also by an

operational typology of blended learning models which can assist teachers. Throughout the paper, we discuss

the potential influence of generative artificial intelligence solutions on digital transformation in education,

highlighting the need for further research in this area. Overall, this paper provides insights into the complex

process of digital transformation in education and offers key components for the advancement of science

teaching and learning in the digital age.

1 INTRODUCTION: DIGITAL

TRANSFORMATION IN

EDUCATION AND BLENDED

LEARNING

The students who attend school in the third decade of

the 21st century are often labelled as digital natives or

generation alpha – they have adopted digital

technologies (DT) in their lives early, intuitively

navigate various devices and apps and mostly

communicate and solve their everyday problems

using DT and the internet. The experience, skills, and

needs that Generation Alpha students bring to school

are unique and cardinally differ from previous

generations of students (Rose & Thomas, 2024),

therefore students learning (in the context of the

present paper in the subject of primary science) starts

from new and novel starting points and is based on

different (compared to previous centuries)

experiences, therefore the previous teaching methods

and subject curriculums should be updated (Mukul &

Büyüközkan, 2023). The authors of the present article

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6302-7305

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5903-2283

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1472-446X

also agree with the thesis, that education and

schooling should change as rapidly as ever before to

meet the current needs of students and society; in

other words – the education system must undergo

digital transformation (Huang et al., 2024). Also, with

the introduction of advanced generative artificial

intelligence solutions (GenAI), DTs can perform

tasks that they have not been able to do before. In the

educational context - numerous instructional tools,

which previously have been exclusive for teachers

(e.g., dialogue with students, feedback) can now be

carried out in an acceptable quality by DTs (i.e.,

GenAI solutions; Giannakos et al., 2024).

From the authors' perspective, such a situation

significantly changes schooling and more particularly

teaching and learning of various school subjects. In

the present paper, we operationalise the “Theoretical

Framework for Digital Teaching and Learning

Transformation” we have proposed before (Figure 1,

(Burgmanis et al., 2024)), to create a typology of

concrete teaching and learning models that include

the digital dimension, further referred as blended

learning (BL) models. In short - in the present

846

Greit

ans, K., Burgmanis, Ä

c. and Namsone, D.

Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of Blended Learning Models.

DOI: 10.5220/0013477200003932

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2025) - Volume 2, pages 846-853

ISBN: 978-989-758-746-7; ISSN: 2184-5026

position paper we attempt to answer the following

research question: how to operationalise the digital

transformation of teaching and learning into concrete

models that can be used in primary science teachers’

professional practice?

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for Digital Teaching and

Learning Transformation

2 CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN

TEACHER, STUDENT,

CURRICULUM AND DIGITAL

TECHNOLOGIES

One classical model for conceptualizing interactions

throughout the schooling process is the didactic (often

referred also as instructional) triangle. The basic

model consists of a triad: student, teacher, and

curriculum as vertices in a triangle; the mutual

interactions between them are represented as the sides

of a triangle. As the DTs emerge and the

transformation advances, multiple authors have

proposed to add a DT dimension to the instructional

triangle – to transform the triangle into a triagonal

pyramid (Figure 2, (Dasari et al., 2023)).

Figure 2: The didactic pyramid.

From our perspective, in the third decade of the

century, the digital technology dimension has

become equivalent to the triad of student, teacher and

curriculum. One example, which justifies this thesis

in a science subject context, is students’ digital

experience before the schooling process. For

example, nowadays students first experience digital

maps before paper maps – digital maps with precise

persons’ locations are present in various vehicles,

smartphones etc, students design and test

constructions and buildings in Minecraft, not in real

environments.

In the context of the didactic triangle (or now –

pyramid) such students’ experience importantly

changes both the curriculum (new ideas and skills

should be added) and also the ways the teacher

presents, and the student accesses the curriculum.

Also, the present example of digital maps justifies the

presence of the DT dimension in the didactic pyramid

– without the DT dimension, neither the curriculum is

accessible to the student, nor the teacher can present

it to the student.

While digital maps are just one example, the

GenAI solutions also massively change the teaching

and learning of science subjects as instructional tools,

previously exclusive to teachers (i.e., analogies,

everyday examples) can be employed by GenAI

solutions. This means that students can access

GenAI-led instruction and generate curriculum

anywhere and anytime based on students’

preferences; the importance of the teacher as a

translator and preparator of the curriculum for the

student decreases (Cukurova, 2024). As the example

of digital maps illustrates, the primary science

curriculum should change in the digital age. The

following paragraph illustrates our perspective on

what aspects of the primary science curriculum in the

digital age should include.

3 A FRAMEWORK FOR

PRIMARY SCIENCE

CURRICULUM IN THE

DIGITAL AGE

As the complexity of society’s demands from science

(including primary science) education increases, also

the complexity of various science curriculum

frameworks increases (Turner et al., 2023). As

mentioned before, we see the novel students’

experience in the digital world as a key element which

influences the primary science curriculum. Besides

that, we state the premise, that the curriculum should

state goals for the student who has broad experience

in the digital world; who daily accesses information,

communicates and learns via DT.

Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of Blended Learning Models

847

Our view on the primary science curriculum in the

digital age can be compared with a shamrock (figure

3). The shamrock emerges from the ground – private,

national or global contexts, from which students

obtain information (learn) by using his or her digital

literacy, which consists of digital competence and the

ability to learn via DT (Holincheck et al., 2022).

As currently tremendous amounts of information

are available to the student, a filter, which

distinguishes high-quality information from other

information is needed; we see the students’ scientific

identity as such filter (Vincent-Ruz & Schunn, 2018).

At the same time, students’ scientific identity is

developed by recognition and as students nowadays

communicate and recognize each other via DT, we

see digital aspects of students’ scientific identity also

as one of the keys to the primary science curriculum.

The three green leaves of the shamrock (which are

based on digital literacy, scientific identity and its

digital aspects - the trunk of the shamrock) can be

compared with key competence areas that primary

science education should foster. Such an approach

corresponds with the approach of the PISA 2025

science framework (OECD, n.d.) (natural science and

environmental science competencies), still, we

propose to add the technological and engineering

competencies as vital for the digital age (also other

countries (Banks, 2024) curriculum include

technology aspects). The three competence areas

(including 9 concrete competencies in total, please

see the green circles in Figure 3) can’t be achieved

without solid foundations – the three leaves of the

shamrock are held by three branches representing

natural science, environmental science and

technological and engineering knowledge. Besides

knowledge, we propose the ability of reasoning

(scientific, socio-scientific and engineering) as

another key aspect of the primary science curriculum,

as for students, GenAI solutions offer answers to

various questions instantly and can lead to student

learning anywhere and anytime. Still, the solutions do

not always produce reliable information. To judge,

whether the information is reliable, students should

be equipped with core scientific knowledge and core

scientific reasoning skills, which the student can use

to evaluate the information provided by GenAI

(Khalid et al., 2024).

In the further paragraphs, we outline how such a

curriculum should be accessed from students’

perspective.

4 WHAT ASPECTS BECOME

MORE IMPORTANT THAN

OTHERS IN PRIMARY

SCIENCE LEARNING FROM

STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE?

Both scholars agree and students expect that primary

science is learned largely through hands-on and

Figure 3: Framework for Primary Science Curriculum in the Digital Age.

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

848

minds-on activities in authentic environments

(Fitzgerald & Smith, 2016), still the advances of DT

have changed the situation. In the last decades, DT

has offered possibilities that complement primary

science learning and even enable students to achieve

more. Digital maps and Minecraft for Education can

be once again mentioned as two clear examples.

From students’ perspective the use of DT can be

viewed twofold (Rezat & Geiger, 2024): 1) the DT

make primary science more interesting; 2) my

(student) previous experience in remote learning

during COVID-19 has been hard and I do not see DT

in learning as effective.

In both cases, it is important, that the student

learns how to learn with DT, not remain as a passive

user of DT either for entertainment or with low

cognitive engagement. We propose the idea, that the

ability to intentionally use certain benefits of the DT

to achieve certain learning outcomes is a key to

students’ success in the digital age (also in the subject

of primary science). We see such skills as AI

prompting, and the use of virtual tutors (i.e.,

Duolingo) as characteristic examples, of where the

school should teach certain skills, otherwise

inequalities between students may grow.

Recent comparative studies indicate that the

duration of students’ use of DT is related to their

performance in learning in digital environments,

therefore, the ways how students can use DT for

learning should also be extensively learned in face-

to-face settings (OECD, 2024). In face-to-face

settings teachers can model the use of DT for

learning; students can share mutual experiences, and

initial troubleshooting can happen with more ease

(Khalid et al., 2024).

In the digital age, students will inevitably spend

more and more of their learning time in digital

environments, still not only ability to learn via DT

influence the outcome of such learning, but also

students’ self-regulated learning skills and motivation

have a noticeable impact (Olokunde, 2023). As

students more and more can control the time, pace,

and place of their learning, there is also a clear need

to support students’ readiness for self-regulated

learning experiences (Voskamp et al., 2022). In other

words – the benefits that digital learning technologies

bring can’t be accessed if the student doesn’t have an

intention to use the technology.

The development of self-regulated learning skills

requires certain settings – such as where the learning

process is goal-oriented, the student has an active role

in his learning and has the need to regulate his

behaviour and motivation, reflect on his learning and

be aware of his thinking processes. As in the case of

learning with DT, and also in the case of self-

regulated learning, concrete skills are efficiently

learned first in face-to-face settings (Kistner et al.,

2010).

To summarize - from a learner perspective the

benefits of digital transformation in primary science

are clear - more choice and voice are given to the

student. Skills to learn with DT, self-regulated

learning skills and motivation are the key aspects

which ensure successful students’ science learning in

the digital age, teachers should support students with

the mentioned aspects and ensure relevant learning

experiences. Still, several questions (from teachers’

perspective) remain: What are the optimal

combinations between face-to-face learning and

learning in the digital environment? What, why and

how should happen in face-to-face learning (Lyu et

al., 2024)?

5 TYPOLOGY OF BLENDED

LEARNING MODELS FROM

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVE

Despite the progress of DT, the hands-on and minds-

on activities in authentic environments remain the

core of primary science teaching, still, as mentioned

before, DT are beneficial to primary science teaching;

the science teacher does not disappear from the

instructional pyramid (Merikko & Kivimäki, 2022).

Science teachers should be supported in this

complicated situation where he or she should

orchestrate face-to-face instruction, digital tools, an

everchanging science curriculum, and students’ self-

regulated learning and motivation. We see that a

typology of various cases (further referred to as

models) illustrating different interactions between

teacher, student, curriculum and DT as a potential

starting for such support. If a clear typology is stated,

the teacher according to students’ needs and the

actual part of the curriculum can choose one or

another model and adapt it to concrete lesson

scenarios.

We use the term “blended learning models” in the

title of the typology as interactions between the

elements of the instructional pyramid can occur both

in F2F and digital environments.

Previously published proposals for blended

learning models view BL from an organisational

perspective (Staker & Horn, 2012). The 7 blended

learning models (e.g. flex model, self-blended model

and others), proposed by Staker & Horn outline the

possible

combinations of F2F and online learning.

Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of Blended Learning Models

849

Figure 4. Typology of Blended Learning Models (bold black lines represent strong interactions between elements; dotted

lines – weak interactions).

Still, the models, proposed by Staker & Horn don’t

outline the interactions between students, teachers

and DT tools which lead to the desired learning

outcomes. In other words, from our perspective, the 7

blended learning models, can’t be meaningfully used

to operationalise teaching and learning, as the models

focus only on organisational perspective, without

such conceptualizations as, for example,

opportunities which students should face in online or

F2F learning to achieve the desired learning goals.

Such an approach can be explained by previous

limitations of DT in education, which made the

teacher role integral in BL.

From our perspective, various models of BL can

be distinguished by the availability of instructional

tools that can transform, translate and teach the

curriculum to students in various learning

environments (Figure 4 and Table 1). There are

several variations in how instructional tools can be

applied with or without the use of DT and F2F

interactions between the student and teacher. The

instructional tools can be employed either as in

“business as usual” - by a teacher who teaches

students F2F, or as in the present situation, where

generative artificial intelligence solutions “bloom” -

via DT.

In the following paragraphs, we outline the

benefits of the BL models and their possible impact

on the elements of the primary science curriculum

framework in the digital age.

To draw the line, where blended learning starts

and ends, we start by outlining our perspective on two

extremes - F2F learning and independent online

learning - and their benefits for primary science.

In primary science F2F learning is essential for

providing students with experiences which build on

their interest in science and stimulate their curiosity

about nature – digital technologies can only hinder

the authentic experiences which students encounter in

various natural ecosystems (van Eijck et al., 2024).

Also, digitalisation and urbanisation hinder students’

experiences in nature, which in such a situation the

school should compensate, to promote a

comprehensive students’ view of nature and science

(Deehan et al., 2024). In terms of the primary science

curriculum framework, F2F learning could benefit

students’ scientific identity (positive emotions about

science) and also engineering competencies (which

stem from real-life experiences).

Independent learning in the adaptive online

environment – is the extreme opposite of F2F

learning. At first glance the model may seem like a

utopia – students learn primary science, a subject

which should bring joy about natural sciences, only

through technology. Nevertheless, the emerging

GenAI and virtual and artificial reality solutions can

bring this model to reality also in primary science.

The first example of how virtual reality in tandem

with dialogue with GenAI can be used in medical

education to explore the human body, its inner organs

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

850

Table 1: Description of the F2F, Blended and Online Learning Models.

F2F/Blended/online

learning

Model

The student's

learning

environment

Use of DT Instruction Curriculum

F2F Learning A

Learning in a real

environment

o DT use in the

classroom, or DT used

only by the teacher

Teacher-led, designed and

controlled learning process

Student observes how the

teacher represents the

curriculum

Blended learning

Technology-

enriched learning

Students use DT in the

classroom or other

settings

Teacher-led learning, with

elements of independent

student learning

DT are used for curriculum

representation, and assessment

in a real environment; there are

elements of students’ learning

in the digital environmen

Flipped

Classroom

Student learning in a

digital learning

environment dominates,

with the help of digital

technologies and face-to-

face interactions

Semi-independent learning.

Student mainly learns before

the F2F lesson.

Curriculum available in a digital

learning environment for

independent learning, followed

by a lesson to extend,

comprehend and assess the

learning outcomes in a real

environmen

Online learning

Independent

learning in a

digital

environment

The learner learns in a

digital environment

using digital

technologies

Student Independently

manages (controls) learning

- at own pace, place, and

time (in the learning

environment curriculum is

roposed by the teacher)

Curriculum available via digital

technologies in a digital

environment for independent

learning (teacher-provided or

generated by DT)

Independent

learning in an

adaptive

environmen

The learner learns in a

digital environment

according to his/her

needs

Independently guided

learning by DT

The curriculum is adapted to the

student's needs by DT

(differentiated learning goals

and support)

and its systems (Mergen et al., 2024). Such goals are

also vital for primary science and with specific

adaptations can contribute to the achievement of the

goals of primary science curriculum, more particular,

scientific knowledge and exploratory competencies.

Models B1, B2 and C1 outline blended learning in

which interactions between student and teacher occur

both online (synchronously and/or asynchronously)

and F2F.

The blended learning models are also valuable for

the achievement of primary science education goals

in the digital age – various digital representations

(i.e., models, simulations) can enhance the view on

scientific ideas and also enhance students’ scientific

reasoning and explanatory abilities (Topping et al.,

2022) (elements of science and environmental

science competencies from the framework), by

illustrating complex processes and/or phenomena that

aren’t observable by the naked eye or simple

instruments.

The flipped learning model– has proven effective

for the acquisition of various knowledge as students

can access information at their own pace and time and

further the f2f learning can deepen the obtained

knowledge and clarify misunderstandings (Topping

et al., 2022). There are numerous reports, on how

digital environments can contribute to the

achievement of the goals of primary science

curriculum. Several reports indicate the benefits such

environments bring to learning through inquiry

and/or design. One such example is the use of

Minecraft for education – in this virtual world,

students can design their engineering solutions and

test their appropriability in a complex virtual world.

Also, this virtual world can be used for scientific

investigations as many natural phenomena are

included (Nebel et al., 2016). Digital knowledge-rich

environments are also valuable for achieving novel

learning outcomes – decision-making (using

scientific knowledge and skills) and appreciation of

the impact of science on people and the environment,

as they provide unlimited opportunities for

collaboration, exploration and argumentation

(Momani et al., 2023). Still, such complex activities

can’t be meaningfully achieved without core skills

and knowledge (which substantially are acquired

through other blended learning models).

To clarify our position – we don’t see the four

proposed models (figure 1, A to C) as a trajectory for

teacher replacement by technologies; we see that the

four models complement each other and should be

selected by the teacher based on the curriculum aspect

which is covered.

Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of Blended Learning Models

851

6 CONCLUSIONS

In the digital age students who are digital natives

bring a wealth of digital skills into the primary

science classroom, which can serve as a powerful

foundation for the development of scientific identity,

knowledge, reasoning and competencies. Integration

of a DT, scientific identity and scientific reasoning

backbone into the primary science curriculum, not

only answers the challenges of the 21

century in the

context of primary science but also can inform

primary science educators about a logical trajectory

of how students’ ability to do and use science evolves.

At the same time, primary science in the digital age

should take into account that students’ real

interactions with nature and technology are

diminishing primary science must also compensate

for them.

To access the primary science curriculum in the

digital age, the students will spend more time learning

with DT, therefore, from students’ perspective ability

to meaningfully learn with DT and self-regulated

learning skills and motivation are the key aspects

which become more important than others. In

addition to F2F teaching and learning (which is and

will stay dominant in primary science) blended

learning models are gaining ground in the digital age,

which differs not only by the use of DT, environments

and instructional tools but also by the presence of

students and/or teachers. Flipped learning, learning in

virtual worlds, and technology-enhanced learning are

three examples of blended learning models which

solve certain problems that students and teachers face

when learning F2F.

Minecraft for Education and the use of digital

maps are two examples which illustrate how the use

of DT in blended learning settings can now enhance

primary science teaching and learning by proposing

the opportunity to reach new and novel and in the

same time for the digital age relevant goals both by

the student and the teacher.

Most importantly, we want to highlight that DT

should be used in primary science in cases where

objective problems in F2F teaching and learning

exist, to solve these problems. Excessive use of DT

can cause additional problems, and hinder the

acquisition of goals, which can be meaningfully

reached in F2F teaching and learning.

We see the proposed frameworks and typologies

as a starting point for further investigation, by the

outline of existing situations and practices both in

science teaching and learning. In the context of

science teaching, teachers’ existing practice, self-

efficacy, confidence and competence can be further

explored. Parallelly in the context of science learning,

students’ accessibility to up-to-date science

education, its impact and student agency and voice

can be further explored.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was funded by the Latvian national state

research project “Letonika: Innovative solutions

for blended learning implementation: teaching

and learning process in the digital transformation

context”, grant number VPP-LETONIKA-

2021/1-0010.

REFERENCES

Banks, F. (2024). Addressing Curriculum Knowledge in

STEM Projects. In Locating Technology Education in

STEM Teaching and Learning (pp. 55–71). Springer.

Burgmanis, G., Namsone, D., Dudareva, I., Greitāns, K., &

Olina, Z. (2024). A Conceptual Model of Blended

Learning in the Context of Digital Teaching and

Learning Transformation. Proceedings of the 16th

International Conference on Computer Supported

Education, 634–641.

Cukurova, M. (2024). The interplay of learning, analytics

and artificial intelligence in education: A vision for

hybrid intelligence. British Journal of Educational

Technology.

Dasari, D., Hendriyanto, A., Sahara, S., Suryadi, D.,

Muhaimin, L. H., Chao, T., & Fitriana, L. (2023).

ChatGPT in didactical tetrahedron, does it make an

exception? A case study in mathematics teaching and

learning. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1295413.

Deehan, J., MacDonald, A., & Morris, C. (2024). A scoping

review of interventions in primary science education.

Studies in Science Education, 60(1), 1–43.

Fitzgerald, A., & Smith, K. (2016). Science that Matters:

Exploring Science Learning and Teaching in Primary

Schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,

41(4), 64–78.

Giannakos, M., Azevedo, R., Brusilovsky, P., Cukurova,

M., Dimitriadis, Y., Hernandez-Leo, D., Järvelä, S.,

Mavrikis, M., & Rienties, B. (2024). The promise and

challenges of generative AI in education. Behaviour

and Information Technology.

Holincheck, N., Galanti, T. M., & Trefil, J. (2022).

Assessing the Development of Digital Scientific

Literacy With a Computational Evidence-Based

Reasoning Tool. Journal of Educational Computing

Research, 60(7), 1796–1817.

Huang, R., Adarkwah, M. A., Liu, M., Hu, Y., Zhuang, R.,

& Chang, T. (2024). Digital Pedagogy for Sustainable

Education Transformation: Enhancing Learner-Centred

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

852

Learning in the Digital Era. Frontiers of Digital

Education 2024, 1–16.

Khalid, I. L., Abdullah, M. N. S., & Mohd Fadzil, H.

(2024). A Systematic Review: Digital Learning in

STEM Education. Journal of Advanced Research in

Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology, 51(1),

98–115.

Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., Dignath-van Ewijk, C.,

Büttner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-

regulated learning in classrooms: Investigating

frequency, quality, and consequences for student

performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 157–

171.

Lyu, Q., Dai, X., Ni, J. Q., Wang, F., Xi, L., An, X., &

Wang, K. (2024). Embracing digital transformation in

animal science education: Exploring students’ digital

self-efficacy, technological literacy, and perspectives of

curriculum updates. Education and Information

Technologies.

Mergen, M., Graf, N., & Meyerheim, M. (2024). Reviewing

the current state of virtual reality integration in medical

education - a scoping review. BMC Medical Education

2024 24:1, 24(1), 1–25.

Merikko, J., & Kivimäki, V. (2022). “Replacing teachers?

Doubt it.” Practitioners’ views on adaptive learning

technologies’ impact on the teaching profession.

Frontiers in Education, 7, 1010255.

Momani, M. A. K. Al, Alharahasheh, K. A., & Alqudah, M.

(2023). Digital learning in Sciences education: A

literature review. Cogent Education, 10(2), 2277007.

Mukul, E., & Büyüközkan, G. (2023). Digital

transformation in education: A systematic review of

education 4.0. Technological Forecasting and Social

Change, 194, 122664.

Nebel, S., Schneider, S., & Rey, G. D. (2016). Mining

Learning and Crafting Scientific Experiments: A

Literature Review on the Use of Minecraft in Education

and Research on JSTOR. Educational Technology and

Society, 19(2), 355–366.

OECD. (n.d.). PISA 2025 Science Framework.

OECD. (2024). PISA 2025 Learning in the Digital World.

Olokunde, T. (2023). Meeting the Learning Needs of K-12

Digital Age Learners With Educational Technologies in

Science Education. In Handbook of Research on

Redesigning Teaching, Learning, and Assessment in the

Digital Era (pp. 177–199). IGI Global Scientific

Publishing.

Rezat, S., & Geiger, V. (2024). The Role of Digital

Technologies in Transforming Student Learning

Landscapes. In Handbook of Digital Resources in

Mathematics Education (pp. 1–22). Springer.

Rose, A., & Thomas, M. R. (2024). Generation Alpha and

Learning Ecosystems. In Preparing Students for the

Future Educational Paradigm

(pp. 19–46).

Staker, H., & Horn, M. (2012). Classifying K-12 Blended

Learning. Innosight Institute.

Topping, K. J., Douglas, W., Robertson, D., & Ferguson,

N. (2022). Effectiveness of online and blended learning

from schools: A systematic review. Review of

Education, 10(2).

Turner, J., Bianchi, L., Eley, A., Lawrence, L., & Sinclair,

A. (2023). Framework for a Future Primary Science

Curriculum.

van Eijck, T., Bredeweg, B., Holt, J., Pijls, M., Bouwer, A.,

Hotze, A., Louman, E., Ouchchahd, A., &

Sprinkhuizen, M. (2024). Combining hands-on and

minds-on learning with interactive diagrams in primary

science education. International Journal of Science

Education.

Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of

science identity and its role as the driver of student

choices. International Journal of STEM Education,

5(1), 1–12.

Voskamp, A., Kuiper, E., & Volman, M. (2022). Teaching

practices for self-directed and self-regulated learning:

case studies in Dutch innovative secondary schools.

Educational Studies, 48(6), 772–789.

Towards Digital Transformation in Primary Science: Typology of Blended Learning Models

853