R E S E A R C H Open Access © The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licens es/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00902-y *Correspondence: Laurence Beruin lcberuin@up.edu.ph 1 University of the Philippines Los Baños, Los Baños, Philippines A systematic literature review of learning privileges experienced by STEM students across pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic learning periods Laurence Beruin 1* 1 Introduction A 2022 Philippine Institute of Development Studies article revealed the dwindling inter- est of young Filipinos in pursuing careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. Its most glaring part was the quality of learning present in which STEM learning appeared limited to lower-order thinking skills, particularly at Discover Education Abstract This study aims to explore the specific aspects of STEM students’ learning privileges observed throughout their academic journey. A systematic descriptive review of literature following the PRISMA statement was utilized to explore three specific periods: Pre-Pandemic (2016 to early 2020), Pandemic (late 2020 to early 2023), and Post-Pandemic (mid-2023 onwards). Data was analyzed through thematic analysis which revealed nine (9) aspects of learning privileges: three (3) overarching aspects consisting of availability, accessibility, and perceived utility; and six (6) primary aspects consisting of learning resources, social support, teaching competencies, individual capacity, technological considerations, and institutional support. A conceptual model was constructed wherein the overarching aspects apply to all primary aspects, depicting how learning privileges is not a sum of individual/student advantages but emerges from the dynamic interplay among different factors. This interconnectedness suggests that STEM students experience varying degrees of learning privileges depending on how favorably the primary aspects align within their specific environments. Consequently, interventions addressing such disparities must be comprehensive rather than separately, driven by the overarching aspects. With educators as potential allies, engaging students to look deeper into what’s right in front of them, be aware of their realities, and go beyond what’s right in front of others, then students, researchers, educators, and stakeholders have the opportunity to take a step in bridging the gap in the Philippine educational setting. Keywords Learning privileges, STEM education, Learning experiences, Secondary education Page 2 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 the Basic Education level. The implementation of the Senior High School (SHS), as part of the K-12 curriculum, in 2016 was met with high expectations to reform and improve overall educational outcomes, especially in encouraging students to venture into STEM- specific fields. However, in its first three years of implementation, students have faced numerous challenges which included but were not limited to inadequate facilities and resources, curriculum issues, and local government unit (LGU)-dependent quality of implementation [1]. Then, the COVID-19 pandemic hit, exasperating the already prob- lematic state of the Philippine educational system. McKenna and Sobuwa (2020) asserted that schools primarily design curricula and learning experiences that align with the backgrounds of middle- and upper-class stu- dents, placing underprivileged learners at a systemic disadvantage. This inherent bias reinforces inequality, making education more accessible to the privileged rather than ensuring equal opportunities. Filipino students from privileged backgrounds have sig- nificantly better access to higher education, with opportunities three times greater than their less affluent peers [2]. Insufficient funding impacts school facilities, teacher sala- ries, scholarships, and technology, hindering essential reforms. Nearly four million stu- dents failed to enroll in the 2020–2021 academic year, with half of out-of-school youth coming from the lowest income brackets. Bautista and Aranas [3] reported that socio- economic status, school type, and early childhood education contribute to low student proficiency, with only top-performing public schools matching private school standards. Limited funding in rural areas has also led to teacher shortages, overcrowded class- rooms, and reduced teacher-student interaction [2, 4]. Whereas the pandemic saw some developments in accelerating the adoption of dis- tance learning modalities and improving technological infrastructure [5], the three school years of fully online and hybrid learning setups revealed different concerns. They highlighted the glaring challenges that affected the quality of learning that the students had experienced. Orbeta and Paqueo [5] reported that we are in a learning crisis, par- ticularly as Filipino students received below-average marks in international standardized assessments. They added that the quality of education provided by private institutions was the only redeeming factor. Similar sentiments were presented by Chanco [6], in which the country depends on private institutions to produce dependable graduates across disciplines and that the gov- ernment is very limited in promoting and providing quality education to the masses. The findings of McDoom et al., [7] study asserted the importance of localized analysis of inequality, particularly in the Philippines that certain spatial and social distinctiveness are critical in achieving critical understanding. Access to quality and innovative STEM learning at the basic education level remains elusive to the majority, specifically within the public school system, and the problem is expected to persist [6]. This exacerbates the already widening gap between public and private institutions and deepening socio- economic disparities. Scholars contended that the current educational system creates an illusion of equal opportunity, while in reality, students from middle- and upper-class backgrounds have privileges that allow them to advance beyond others [8, 9]. In global discourse, STEM is conceptualized as an integrated, interdisciplinary approach to learning that bridges science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to address complex problems [10, 11]. While some progress has been made in its appli- cation, STEM instruction in the Philippines remains largely separated, with disciplines Page 3 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 taught and assessed independently across both basic and higher education [12, 13]. This persistent separation is a concern that needs to be addressed, especially amid ongoing discussions on proposed curriculum revisions at both levels. The studies included in this literature review reflect this reality, as the focus are on students enrolled in STEM tracks or programs without explicitly employing integrated STEM pedagogies. There- fore, in this study, STEM students shall refer to students within these tracks or programs regardless of whether their curriculum reflects full integration. This contextualization is critical for interpreting the identified learning privileges, as these may be shaped by existing curricular and institutional challenges in the implementation of STEM disci- plines. Although numerous studies have properly documented and examined the extent of STEM students' experiences (see succeeding sections), local studies that specifically explore invisible privileges contributing to the proliferation of the gap and disparities in educational opportunities remain limited, particularly among STEM students. To address this issue, Pease [14] emphasizes the need to recognize these privileges individuals experience daily as a step toward confronting systemic inequalities. Black and Stone [15] described privilege as necessitating power dynamics emphasizing any entitlement, sanction, power, and advantage or right granted to a person or group solely by birthright membership in a prescribed group/s (p. 245). As a form of social advantage, privilege proliferates the existence of a gap or divide amongst individuals from different walks of life. When it comes to exposing our realities, Pease [14] explained that we tend to turn a blind eye to our advantages especially if we are not part of the elite-non elite dichotomy. By concealing ourselves with the narrative, “ Ginusto ko ba ito ? [Did I ask for this?]”, we are allowing the proliferation of systematically conferred advantages that ben- efit us and not the other. In Pease’s words; “ [M]any privileged individuals may oppress people without being aware of it. By simply exercising our prerogatives in everyday life, we can easily ignore how others are denied the same opportunities as us (p. 10) ” In the Philippines, akin to other developing nations, our society tends to accept that our reality is simply out of our control. In connection with this, the concept of Bahala na , loosely translated as “Come what may,” represents a complex psychological and cultural phenomenon that merits deeper examination in understanding Filipino responses to adversity. Hong [16] characterized this mindset as embodying "deterministic optimism", a paradoxical orientation that maintains hope while simultaneously accepting predetermined outcomes. This philo- sophical and psychological stance manifests as a form of adaptive fatalism, where indi- viduals acknowledge their limited control over circumstances while maintaining faith in eventual positive resolution. Hong argued that this mindset justifies struggles, shifts blame to the system and its beneficiaries and relinquishes responsibility to a benevolent God. That it functions as both a coping mechanism and a form of systemic complic- ity, thriving in contexts where human agency is systematically constrained. This attitude is rooted from a lack of personal agency and an unfair system that reinforces it. The key issue is human agency, which is essential for recognizing privilege and addressing inequality. Hogan [16] described privilege in education as the luxury of ignoring one's social advantages, like living in a bubble. He argues that privilege benefits some students but not all and can be earned or unearned, consciously recognized, or unconsciously expe- rienced. During adolescence, a key stage of identity formation, secondary students often Page 4 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 focus on personal struggles, academic demands, and mental dilemmas, sometimes lead- ing to narcissistic tendencies [17, 18]. Each day brings them closer to their or their par- ents' goal of completing school and moving forward. Blanco and Saunders [19] highlighted that privilege is both embodied, rooted in lived experiences, and contextual, shaped by specific environments. Pease [14] argued that human agency constructs and institutionalizes privilege, reinforcing oppressive power dynamics. As education reflects societal patterns of privilege and marginaliza- tion, Hogan’s [20] emphasis on schools prompted examining the privileges students experience to provide deeper insights into their learning and the state of education they receive. Specifically, Hogan [20] described said privileges as academic privileges, defining them as a set of factors within an educational environment that, influenced by diverse per- sonal, economic, and social circumstances, create social advantages, both consciously and unconsciously, for certain individuals or groups. Hogan’s original conception of ‘academic privilege’ captured the essence of privilege in the educational setting and how it proliferates an individual’s ‘living in the bubble’ mentality. The concept of academic privilege has been studied by Robinson [21] in court cases about ethical practices in the social sciences revealed how the concept was also utilized to maintain and protect the academic freedom granted to scholars and researchers in higher education. Di Leo [22] highlighted how academic privilege, as deemed by researchers, generally focuses on the prestige several educational institutions, particularly in the US, offer and how such levels of prestige objectify the importance of rank within and outside of academia. The concept of learning privileges, derived from a previous study [23], emphasized the broader scope of students’ experiences beyond the classroom. While the author’s previ- ous study initially distinguished learning from academics based on pandemic-era educa- tion occurring in virtual and home settings, this distinction may not fully capture the concept’s depth. Instead, learning should focus on the process of acquiring and modi- fying knowledge through direct interactions and experiences with one’s environment. While learning privilege shares conceptual territory with similar constructs, the author argues that it offers direct and distinct analytical value. Whereas educational privilege focuses on institutional access and resources across transnational mechanisms to con- solidate advantages (see [24]), the proposed conceptualization of learning privileges encompass informal, experiential, and cultural knowledge acquisition beyond traditional schooling, driven primarily by the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic. In principle, its proposed definition builds upon Bandura’s [25] social learning theory by incorporating critical analysis of how social structures create systematically different learning environ- ments, unequal access to role models, and disparate opportunities for developing the self-efficacy essential for lifelong learning. Building upon Howard’s [26] work, it further extends privilege theory into pedagogical domains, specifically addressing the capacity and opportunity to learn rather than accumulated knowledge itself within specific socio- cultural context. To truly delineate the concept of learning privilege, particularly when moving away from a pandemic-centric setting, the first step is to conceptualize a definition that caters directly to its intended subject—the students and their learning experiences. Thus, learning privilege is operationalized as a set of factors within a specific environment, influenced by diverse personal, economic, and social circumstances, that create social Page 5 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 advantages, both consciously and unconsciously, favoring certain students as observed and manifested through their learning experiences. By focusing on the privileges avail- able to students in the school, their community, or even their homes, we can further understand the extent of what students have experienced and are still experiencing. In taking the necessary first step to addressing the learning privileges that reinforce the educational inequalities, the main objective of this study is to explore the specific aspects of STEM SHS students’ learning privileges that were observed throughout their academic journey, in terms of: pre-pandemic learning (2016 to early 2020), pandemic learning (mid to late 2020 to early 2023), and post-pandemic (mid to late 2023 onwards). These pandemic and post-pandemic classifications were determined with reference to major global and national milestones: March 11, 2020 which was the WHO declaration of COVID-19 as a pandemic; and WHO declaration in May 2023 that COVID-19 was no longer constituted as a public health emergency of international concern [27]. By focusing on STEM students' learning experiences across pre-pandemic, pandemic, and post-pandemic periods, this study reveals the specific aspects of learning privileges that students have consciously or unconsciously experienced and manifested. Longitu- dinal approach was chosen because, as an educator who drew upon direct experience and observations of these periods, the pandemic created unprecedented disruptions to the Philippine educational system, providing a natural experiment to examine how learning privileges respond to systemic change. By evaluating the collected data across these three distinct periods, we can paint a clearer picture of what has improved, what remained constant, and who gained advantages amongst their peers during this trans- formative decade. Such analysis contributes to the body of literature on privileges within educational settings by demonstrating their resilience, evolution, or even retention under varying conditions. 2 Method A systematic descriptive review of literature was utilized. Paré & Kitsiou [28] stated that the goal of this type of literature review is to determine the extent to which a body of knowledge in a particular research topic reveals any interpretable pattern or trend with respect to pre-existing propositions, theories, methodologies or findings (p. 162) This study adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (PRISMA) statement which suggested the four phases in information flow, namely: iden- tification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion [29]. This method provided a clear frame- work for data collection, analysis, and reporting, with the PRISMA approach ensuring rigor, objectivity, and transparency. Notably, the findings were data-driven and evidence- based, supporting effective knowledge synthesis and recommendations. The first phase is the identification of records specifically, the journal articles that align with the primary objective. An online search was conducted from December 2024 to early January 2025. The following keywords were used in the search process: “STEM AND students AND Philippines”. Utilizing these keywords, the goal is to exhaust every available article that focuses on STEM SHS students and their learning experiences within the given period. The databases used were Google Scholar, EBSCO, and Philip- pine E-Journals. Since the study focused on three periods and the articles published in 2020 and 2023 overlapped, an advanced search option was used, whenever available, to ensure a targeted search between two ranges: 2016 to 2020 and 2021 to 2024. Page 6 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 The second phase is screening, wherein the inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) focus on STEM SHS students’ academic and learning experiences in the Philippines; (2) peer- reviewed articles; 3) published between 2016 and 2024. For Google Scholar, Harzing’s Publish or Perish (PoP) software was utilized revealing the first 20-page results that were checked for applicability. As a specific measure, succeeding pages in the actual website either contained a similar article found on the previous pages (with different DOI) or had no direct relevance to the inputted keywords. For consistency and ease of analysis, only English articles were screened. PoP was also run to check for duplicates with the other databases revealing 84 results. In addition, based on their titles and description/ abstract (whichever is available), articles were excluded based on the following: studies that focused on teachers, parents, grade school, or college students were excluded due to misalignment with the target population (n = 158); studies had a foreign locale or was part of comparative analysis across regions that could introduce contextual differences affecting the target setting (n = 24); and full-text unavailability due to lack of access to paid journal databases (n = 72). In terms of selection bias, the author screened English-language studies that may affect overall generalizability within the Philippine setting as some STEM-related stud- ies are written in their local language/s. The author initially aimed to include pre-prints, working papers, and other unpublished research from platforms like Academia.edu, recognizing their potential to provide valuable insights. However, ensuring data trust- worthiness, validity, and reliability through a rigorous peer-review process remained the priority. The third phase is eligibility, during which articles were read in full to confirm their applicability, in addition to the previously mentioned inclusion and exclusion criteria. This step ensured that only articles addressing STEM learning privileges were included in the data corpus. Due to date overlaps, articles published in 2020 or 2021 with data collected and submitted before February 2020 were classified as pre-pandemic. Articles published between 2020 and 2023, except those with data collection and submission on or before May 2023, were categorized as pandemic articles. Finally, articles published from 2023 to December 2024 were classified as post-pandemic. As instances of unre- ported or ambiguously described data collection periods were present in the reviewed literature, the author acknowledges that using the publication date as a proxy is imper- fect and may not always align with when the data were gathered. With the exception of articles with explicitly stated data gathering timeframe (such as Hizon et al. [30], Manalo et al. [31]), this approach allowed for consistent classification across all sources. For the final phase, inclusion, a thorough review of each article resulted in the follow- ing distribution: 37 articles for pre-pandemic analysis, 68 for pandemic analysis, and 20 for post-pandemic analysis. Qualitative synthesis through thematic analysis was utilized to analyze the existing literature on STEM students’ experiences and specific learning privileges that they likely manifested and/or experienced (Fig. 1). In terms of ethical consideration, this systematic review only analyzed publicly avail- able literature on the aforementioned databases. This required no institutional ethical clearance. However, the author maintained ethical responsibility through accurate rep- resentation of author/s' work, proper attribution and citation, and transparent reporting of methods employed. All sources were treated with respect for intellectual property and Page 7 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 original contributions to the issue at hand, with oversight and guidance from a research supervisor throughout the review process. 3 Data analysis Thematic analysis in a constructionist method was employed by focusing on themes at the interpretative level [32]. By theorizing on the socio-cultural contexts, circumstances, and conditions, we can understand the underlying privileges that enabled the students’ learning experiences. As a qualitative analytic method, Braun and Clarke explained that thematic analysis offers more flexibility in choosing the analysis framework. A theme generally depends on how it captures significant patterns concerning the overall research question, irrespective of its frequency in a data corpus. Following the thematic analysis process, the first step was transcript creation and data familiarization which was con- ducted through initial data extraction of relevant data segments included the publication date, author, abstract, and key findings relevant to learning privileges. As sole coder, two complete manual coding cycles was conducted, spaced three weeks apart (from January to February 2025), to check for consistency between initial and subsequent coding as a means to enhance coding reliability. All coding decisions and any adjustments were documented in separate Excel sheets for each learning period. Data analysis identified 29 preliminary themes from pre-pandemic articles, 42 from pandemic articles, and 25 from post-pandemic articles. Data extraction was conducted separately for each period, Pre-Pandemic, Pandemic, and Post-Pandemic, resulting in three independent Excel spreadsheets containing article details, extracted quotations, and preliminary codes. Each spreadsheet was systematically reviewed for accuracy and completeness. Codes and theme labels were then cross-checked across the three datas- ets to ensure consistency in definitions, patterns, and thematic boundaries. These pre- liminary themes were subsequently consolidated and organized as sub-themes within Fig. 1 Identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion phases of Learning Privileges Page 8 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 each emergent (final) theme, as detailed in the Results section. Since the number of articles varied considerably between periods, Table 1 shows the distribution of articles per themes which allowed for fairer comparison across periods with unequal sample sizes. The table also outlines the emergent themes that were generated from the coding process, specifies their corresponding sub-themes, and indicates the number of articles associated with each final theme. Presenting the data in this manner not only allows for greater transparency in how the literature was categorized and how themes were con- solidated from initial codes to final categories, but also provides a clearer look into each emergent theme and how it manifested across different time periods. Following repeated readings of the coded excerpts, categories were iteratively collapsed and reorganized to produce refined themes aligned with the operational definition of “learning privilege.” For example, the pre-pandemic preliminary theme work immersion/ OJT was initially categorized as a teaching strategy but later reclassified under Institu- tional backing because the gathered data reflected systemic support structures in the form of private–public partnership and institutional program mandates. Institutional backing was later labeled as Institutional support following the above reason. Similarly, the pandemic preliminary theme internet dependency was first categorized under Tech- nological considerations. However, upon further review, it was subsequently grouped within Individual capacities since the literature described it more in terms of students’ adaptability, effort, and resilience in managing connectivity challenges, rather than the availability of technology. Similar pattern was applied to other preliminary themes under this emergent theme. The process continued until thematic saturation was reached, indi- cated by the stabilization of emergent themes, sub-themes, and operational descriptions. This iterative approach ensured that final themes reflected both the distinct characteris- tics of each period and the overarching dimensions of learning privilege identified across the dataset. As prescribed by Naeem et al. [33], a conceptual model was constructed to provide a structured interpretation of key findings. An audit trail was maintained throughout the research process, primarily with ver- sioned Excel files for each period which preserved the initial coding, author source, pre- liminary (sub) themes, thematic revisions, and emergent (final) themes. Remarks and annotations were embedded in the Remarks column or commented within each cell (as needed), explaining the rationale for reclassification or merging of themes. These steps aimed to ensure transparency, traceability, and rigor in the movement from raw data to the conceptual model. The draft manuscript was reviewed by a research supervisor, who provided feedback on the clarity of presentation and confirmed that the results as firmly grounded in the reviewed literature, thereby enhancing the quality of the analysis. 3.1 Author’s reflexivity The writing of this reflexivity statement was guided by Braund et al. [34]. As a teacher in the secondary level, the author had firsthand experience and observations of the reali- ties of STEM students. The author’s professional background in STEM learning expe- riences and prior research on similar topic, albeit focused on pandemic period only, informed the initial lens for data interpretation. The author approached this review from a constructivist perspective, viewing knowledge as socially constructed, which may have influenced my focus on how meaning is created within the existing literature. Page 9 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 Learning period No. of articles reviewed No. of prelimi- nary themes Frequency of sub-themes per emergent theme Preliminary (sub) themes Articles per theme* Pre-pandemic 37 29 Accessibility (3) Accessibility of technological resources; access to school resources/facility; ac- cess to a conducive school environment 16 Availability (5) availability of learning materials; avail- ability of science or computer labora- tory; availability of competent teachers; provision of other learning facilities 18 Perceived util- ity (3) perceived utility of learning resource/ teaching strategies/school facilities; quality of curriculum and policies imple- mented; positive perception to social and external support 15 Learning resources (2) learning resources; school facilities and learning environment 12 Social support (3) peer support; family support; teacher assistance 6 Teaching com- petencies (3) teacher competency; innovative teach- ing strategies; capacity to integrate technology in classes 23 Individual capacity (4) capacity to utilize technology; financial capacity; capacity to maximize learning; personal well-being 14 Technological considerations (3) internet connectivity; gadgets; learning strategies (gamification and digital tools) 10 Institutional support (3) curriculum/program/policies imple- mented by the school; personnel management; external support 11 Table 1 Distribution of Articles per Emergent Theme Page 10 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 Learning period No. of articles reviewed No. of prelimi- nary themes Frequency of sub-themes per emergent theme Preliminary (sub) themes Articles per theme* Pandemic 68 42 Accessibility (5) Accessibility of stable internet connec- tivity; access to digital resources/LMS/ virtual laboratory; access to a conducive learning environment; access to quality devices; access to supplementary learn- ing resources 24 Availability (4) availability of learning resources and gadgets; availability of peer interac- tion; availability of competent teachers; availability of technical and institutional support 20 Perceived util- ity (5) perceived utility of learning resource/ school facilities; positive perception to- wards curriculum/work immersion/poli- cies implemented; positive perception to social and external support; varied perception to modality shift; percep- tions to teaching strategies 37 Learning resources (4) learning resources; supplementary learning materials; digital resources offered by school; learning environment at home 36 Social support (5) learner-to-learner interactions; online collaborations; peer support; family sup- port; teacher assistance 36 Teaching com- petencies (3) teacher competency; engaging teach- ing strategies; capacity to effectively utilize technology in classes 30 Individual capacity (8) coping strategies; internet dependency; financial capacity; capacitiy to maximize learning; mental preparedness; physical well-being; mental well-being; personal effort 34 Technological considerations (4) stable internet connectivity; learning devices; learning modalities; indepen- dent learning 25 Institutional support (4) improvement of curriculum/program/ policy implemented by the school; personnel management; external (government) support; student support services 27 Table 1 (continued) Page 11 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 Consequently, there was initial expectations that similar findings be revealed, which became the basis of the constructed conceptual model. While this familiarity provided deeper insight into the nuances of learning privilege, it also posed the risk of reinforc- ing proposed conceptual categories. To address this and monitor potential biases, the author engaged in reflexive practice throughout the coding process, recording initial assumptions, coding decisions, and reflections in the Excel sheet after each session. The- matic codes and emerging categories were revisited multiple times during the analysis, with particular attention to whether they were supported by the literature reviewed. Discrepancies were resolved by re-examining source texts and analytical notes to ensure data-driven rather than assumption-based decision. The reflections throughout the pro- cess will be viewed as substantial lessons to improve in the scholarly conduct of unpack- ing learning privileges. Lastly, the author acknowledges that their interpretation may be shaped by the above assumptions. 4 Results By doing an extensive literature review of STEM students’ learning experiences through three learning periods, several specific aspects of STEM students’ learning privileges were observed throughout their academic journey. Nine (9) themes emerged from the data corpus in the context of learning privileges. These consist of three (3) overarch- ing aspects—availability, accessibility, and perceived utility—and six (6) primary aspects: learning resources, social support, technological considerations, individual capacity, Learning period No. of articles reviewed No. of prelimi- nary themes Frequency of sub-themes per emergent theme Preliminary (sub) themes Articles per theme* Post-pandemic 20 25 Accessibility (3) Accessibility of stable internet connec- tivity; access to learning materials; ac- cess to conducive learning environment 15 Availability (3) availability of learning resources; availability of competent teachers; avail- ability of school facilities 9 Perceived util- ity (3) perceived utility of learning resource/ school facilities; positive perception to conducive learning environment; varied perception to modality shift 12 Learning resources (2) learning resources; school facilities 9 Social support (3) peer support; family support; teacher assistance 6 Teaching com- petencies (2) teacher competency; engaging teach- ing strategies 11 Individual capacity (3) capacity to utilize technology; capacity to maximize learning; overall well-being 8 Technological considerations (3) stable internet connectivity; learning devices; learning modalities 10 Institutional support (3) improvement of curriculum/program implemented by the school; administra- tive and government support; student support services 6 * Number of articles per theme in which, one article may address multiple themes, hence totals exceed the number of articles reviewed Table 1 (continued) Page 12 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 teaching competencies, and institutional support. The corresponding sub-themes for each emergent theme are included in their definitions, as shown in Table 2. Based on the data corpus, as one of the overarching aspects of learning privilege, availability is operationalized as the presence or absence of learning resources, social support, technological considerations, student’s capacity to maximize learning, teach- ing competencies, and institutional support. Before the onset of the pandemic, while the government had provided the essential learning material to implement the STEM curriculum under the K-12 program, shortages in the instructional material plagued its early implementation [35, 36]. Textbooks and reference materials provided by the school serve as one of the primary learning resources for STEM students [37]. Data revealed that teachers were eager to implement numerous activities to facilitate their classes, with access to a fast internet connection as an opportunity for alternative learning. Pre-pandemic, one strategy was gamification but the unavailability of computers in schools hindered its adoption [38]. Jaudinez [39] reported that in place of MS Excel, students without access to laptops or computers opt for traditional calculation through pen and paper. In terms of facilities, there are schools with no laboratories or if a sci- ence lab is present, it is either non-functional or unavailable to most students [35, 40]. During the pandemic, unavailability of certain resources remains present in the form of limited to non-existent: technical support for LMS and other tech-related concerns (see [41, 42]); gadgets and similar learning devices [43, 44] and even laboratory materi- als at home. Post-pandemic results revealed the improved availability of gadgets/devices among STEM students [45, 46]. Yet, Radasa [47] reported the limited physical laboratory facilities, an issue rampant pre-pandemic. Table 2 Descriptions of the nine (9) aspects of learning privileges Category Aspect Definition Overarching aspects Availability Presence or absence of learning resources, social support, technological considerations, student’s capacity to maximize learning, effective teaching competencies, and institutional support Accessibility Student’s capacity to access the learning resources, social support, tech- nological considerations, student’s capacity to maximize learning, effective teaching competencies, and institutional support Perceived utility Degree to which the various learning resources, social support, techno- logical considerations, student’s capacity to maximize learning, teaching competencies, and institutional support meet the expectations of overall students development Primary aspects Learning resources Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility of learning materials, digital resources, learning management system, school facilities for learning, and a conducive learning environment for STEM students Social support Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility of the extent of support that STEM students have experienced from their classmates, friends, family, and teachers to continue their learning Teaching competencies Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility in terms of teachers’ qualifica- tion competency to showcase STEM expertise, apply innovative and engag- ing teaching strategies, and integrate technology in all aspects of learning Individual capacity Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility of a STEM student’s capacity to maximize learning through coping strategies, technological compe- tency, overall resilience, and financial capacity Technological considerations Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility of internet connectivity, learn- ing modality, and learning devices Institutional support Availability, accessibility, and perceived utility of support provided in cur- riculum management, student support services, educational assistance, personnel management, funding and policy improvements by the school administration, government, and other external stakeholders Page 13 of 29 Beruin Discover Education (2025) 4:459 On the other hand, as one of the overarching aspects of learning privilege, accessibil- ity is operationalized as the student’s capacity to access the learning resources, social support, technological considerations, student’s capacity to maximize learning, teach- ing competencies, and institutional support. Using gadgets with internet access allowed students to engage in alternative and creative ways to learn [38, 48–50]. Some schools are encouraged to use Learning Management Systems (LMS) as part of students’ learn- ing (see [51, 52]), however acc