Renewed concentration on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) education in school curriculum may be creating a false sense of security and may be anchored in fiction rather than realism. While in the past, educational schedules strove for balance of science, technology, maths, humanities and arts, a prevailing sense of urgency to update school curriculum with STEM to meet modern demands may be undermining learning and creating an unhealthy imbalance.
My AJC featured an analysis by Texas A&M and George Washington University graduate John Morris of the STEM education and common misconceptions surrounding this. The following outlines four possible ways in which STEM education concentration may be undermining the learning and future of modern students.
1. Educators and parents should not view STEM education as an arena that offers different scientific and mathematical fundamentals. John Morris pointed out that principles on science, chemistry, physics, maths such the fundamentals of geometry by Euclid and of calculus by Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz remained the same throughout centuries.
2. STEM education may be forcing both educators and students into a mould that is not made for them. According to John Morris, STEM education should be understood as an educational theme that may be suited only for teachers and students whose proclivities align with the STEM fields of learning and livelihood. STEM education is not a prize to aspire by those whose talents and skills are more remarkable in other fields.
3. Clearer grasp and understanding of the requirements to STEM education should be reached. "For example, the U.S. Department of Education claims disciplines such as English, history, and civics can provide a solid foundation for teaching computer science concepts," John Morris said. "The notion that English provides a solid foundation for teaching computer science is no less ludicrous than believing a computer science degree provides a solid foundation for teaching English."
Four Teachers, Four Classrooms, One Cross-Curricular STEM Course https://t.co/FE30JHFK9K #STEM
— STEM Ed Coalition (@StemEdCoalition) 7 April 2016
4. Both STEM and humanities threads of learning and livelihood should be accorded corresponding respect. Neither learning and livelihood under STEM nor those under Humanities should be reduced by a one-size fits all mentality. Today's society is a product of the contributions of hard sciences (STEM), soft sciences (e.g. anthropology, philosophy, psychology, sociology) arts and humanities.
Financial Review reports that Andrew Norton, who is the higher education program director at the Grattan Institute in Australia, points out that society should not panic over pushing STEM education. Andrew Norton believes that the hoo-ha over STEM education shortage, in fact, is a seriously misleading notion.
