Pondering STEM
As an educator involved in science instruction for more than two decades, the value of STEM as a focus in interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary instruction is important. School administrators and school boards easily understand that STEM is a means to engage and attract the best and brightest students. Many educators understand what goes into STEM and what you need for it, but the process of implementing a STEM curriculum within the classroom is elusive on the best of days. There is a dilemma for all educators and learners when crafting a response to the question, “What does STEM look like in the classroom?” The common response is that STEM is simply any configuration of the disciplines with little regard for the outcome of the lesson. In other words, anything can be called STEM as long as it incorporates one, some, or all of the four disciplines commonly associated with STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
While the concept of STEM sounds wonderful at a philosophical level, applying such a vague notion becomes problematic when paired with the expectations of targeted and rigorous quality instruction. Building a race car is a great way for students to learn problem-solving skills, but without a scientific phenomenon, it is just a fun project.
Many articles have described STEM as a solution to problem-solving or a way to help students become better problem-solvers. For example, many references have been made to problem- or project-based learning. While these types of instructional methods are often the focus, most articles focus on the integration of the components of STEM with little regard for HOW the instruction must occur.
It is here the work begins with re-envisioning STEM. When the topic of STEM comes up in conversations with colleagues, it is important to anchor the thinking that STEM is a process, not a thing.
Comments
Post a Comment