STEM and STEAM Education: Purpose, Theories, and Outcomes

Introduction to STEM and STEAM Education

Many countries are currently placing strong emphasis on the need to prepare students for higher education and equip them with the skills and knowledge required in the 21st century. To achieve this goal, learning institutions have adopted the STEAM approach, nurturing students in Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics. This approach has gained widespread support from all stakeholders in the education sector, including educators, students, parents, and government leaders. STEAM is viewed as a means of cultivating a long-lasting interest in arts and sciences from an early age. The subjects grouped under STEAM are broadly similar in that they all involve creative processes in the investigation of subject matter. Teaching such skills prepares students for innovation in an ever-evolving world — a benefit both to individual students and to the nation as a whole (USD, 2018).

The professional development (PD) implementation plan is intended to cultivate critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and creativity in students. It also prepares students to thrive in a dynamic 21st-century work environment (USD, 2018). The theories of constructivism and cognitivism are central to the PD plan.

Morrison, McDuffie, and French (2015) studied the essential components of STEAM in schools and found that both teaching and learning were problem-based and centered on inquiry. This environment motivated students and improved their social interactions and collaboration. Laforce et al. (2016) outlined eight essential elements of inclusive STEM high schools:

Together, these elements represent the goals and strategies applied by pro-STEM high schools across the country, forming a clear picture of what inclusive STEM schools look like in practice. These same elements are incorporated into the implementation plan.

Support for STEAM Programs

STEAM programs are diverse in scope and serve as foundational drivers of innovation because they begin at the grassroots level. The Art of Science, based in Memphis, Tennessee, for example, seeks to unite artists and scientists and communicate the beauty of science through art. Descience similarly aims to inspire fashion designers through scientific discovery. The Ligo Project is another avenue for bringing together scientists and artists: it runs a six-month program in which artists are paired with scientists to create works of art inspired by scientific inquiry. Such projects are frequently exhibited during the Art of Science Gallery Night.

STEAM has also received support from professional societies. The American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), for instance, views STEAM as an effective method for connecting with the broader public. The Committee for Postdocs and Students (COMPASS) supports STEAM projects through outreach grants. One such program is EURICA (Emerging Undergraduate Research-Inspired Cell Art), a multidisciplinary science initiative aimed at raising student interest in science. In one iteration of the program, students conducted scientific experiments and were then required to create a piece of art based on their experience (Hegedus, Segarra, Allen, Wilson, Garr, & Budzinski, 2016). Margaret Corbit presented a related example at CESTEMER 2014, elaborating on the use of 3D virtual worlds to inspire creativity in children and increase their engagement in challenging projects (Corbit, Bernstein, Kolodziej, & McIntyre, 2006). These STEAM outreach projects have encouraged participants to consider careers in science and have helped bridge the gap between the community and the scientific world.

Daugherty, Carter, and Swagerty (2014) emphasized the need for teachers to prepare pre-service teachers (PSTs) to integrate the different STEAM disciplines. Frykholm and Glasson (2005) similarly proposed that science and mathematics teachers be taught pedagogical strategies to address overlapping content and to demonstrate the connections between different content areas. Without such interdisciplinary experiences during their training, teachers are unlikely to integrate content in their future classrooms (Daugherty, Carter, & Swagerty, 2014; Kurt & Pehlivan, 2013).

Theories of Learning: Cognitivism and Constructivism

Every behavior exhibited by a human being is backed by an underlying thought process. This is the central claim of the theory of cognitivism. The theory holds that humans process information they receive before acting — they do not simply respond to stimuli subconsciously. Cognitivism likens the learner's mind to a mirror from which new ideas are reflected. The learner seeks to understand how new information affects them, typically by comparing it with what is already stored in memory.

Cognitivism holds that internal processing of information is necessary for learning. In other words, the theory focuses on what is happening in the learner's mind rather than on observable behavior — though observable actions can be used to infer mental processes. Learning requires that a person's experiences be transformed: one may encounter new experiences or revise existing ones. Learning is therefore both a change in behavior and a change in knowledge. The following concepts from cognitivism theory will be incorporated into the PD plan:

The theory of constructivism relates a person's experiences and prior knowledge to the way they perceive the world. Because different individuals interpret their experiences differently, learning is unique to each person — it is the learner who constructs meaning. Constructivism defines learning as a process through which one builds new concepts in relation to what one already knows. Each individual possesses a unique mental model that makes sense of their experiences. At times it is necessary to reconcile conflicting experiences. Learning can therefore be defined as the process by which an individual adjusts their mental model to accommodate new experiences. Constructivism is particularly relevant wherever problem-solving is required, making it highly applicable to student learning. The following components of constructivism will be incorporated into the PD plan:

References

Bush, S. B., & Cook, K. L. (2016). Constructing authentic and meaningful STEAM experiences through university, school, and community partnerships. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 51(1), 57–69. Retrieved from https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=jste

Corbit, M., Bernstein, R., Kolodziej, S., & McIntyre, C. (2006). Student project virtual worlds as windows on scientific cultures in CTC SciFair. The 9th International Conference on Public Communication of Science and Technology; Seoul, Korea.

Daugherty, M. K., Carter, V., & Swagerty, L. (2014). Elementary STEM education: The future for technology and engineering education? Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 49(1), 45–55.

Frykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127–141. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x

Hegedus, T., Segarra, V. A., Allen, T., Wilson, H., Garr, C., & Budzinski, C. (2016). The art-science connection: Students create art inspired by extracurricular investigations. Science Teacher, 83, 25–31.

Kim, S-W., & Lee, Y. (2016). The analysis on research trends in programming based STEAM education in Korea. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(24). doi:10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i24/96102

Kurt, K., & Pehlivan, M. (2013). Integrated programs for science and mathematics: Review of related literature. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(2), 116–121. Retrieved from

Laforce, M., Noble, E., King, H., Century, J., Blackwell, C., Holt, S., … Loo, S. (2016). The eight essential elements of inclusive STEM high school. International Journal of STEAM Education, 3(12). Retrieved from

Morrison, J., McDuffie, A. R., & French, B. (2015). Identifying key components of teaching and learning in a STEM school. Integrated STEM Education [Research Paper]. Retrieved from

Tharp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1991). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Townsley, K. G. (2017). From STEM to STEAM: The neuroscience behind the movement towards arts integration in K-12 curricula (Bachelor's thesis). Retrieved from https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1475&context=honorstheses

USD. (2018). STEAM education: A 21st century approach to learning. Retrieved from https://onlinedegrees.sandiego.edu/steam-education-in-schools/

Wilkerson, S. B., & Haden, C. M. (2014). Effective practices for evaluating STEM out-of-school time programs. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1021960.pdf