Improving skills in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) is important in preparing the future workforce for a strong economy that benefits society; no country wants to be left behind in the techno-industrial arms race. But (perhaps) an overemphasis on STEM education in many education systems has led to a range of discourses of dissatisfaction (see Colucci-Gray et al., 2017), discourses that drive many elements of the STEAM (STEM plus Arts) agenda where the arts are often conceived as valuable in humanising, expanding and improving engagement in the sciences.

One discourse of dissatisfaction relates to connections claimed to exist between the four STEM subjects. Other dissatisfaction discourses argue that STEM is too narrow, that it excludes natural and long-lived connections between the arts and humanities; that STEM perpetuates a destructive form of science, and that it excludes a breadth of society – the list continues. These dissatisfactions are all dimensions of the broad church of STEAM education research that the new BERA STEAM education research special interest group (SIG) embraces, not just for each separate issue, but for how each mediates and is mediated by the others. Of central concern to the SIG is what kind of education can address these dissatisfactions and how can such curricula and practices can be enacted. Underpinning many of these dissatisfactions is a common drive to enrich subject learning with multiple perspectives, hence our focus here on how STEAM education requires and thereby advances more integrated curricula.

STEM is rarely realised in our curricula as an integrated approach to different subjects. In most schooling systems, school children experience Mathematics and Science as separate subjects, typically separate also from any technological design or engineering practice. Indeed, Engineering is rarely apparent (beyond in some, predominantly US, maker-space, FabLab or tinkering curriculum projects). Technology is also situated in diverse places: product design, art and design, game design. While many hold that Mathematics constitutes the language of the physical sciences, technologies and engineering practices, it is an exceptional school that advances it as a language, comparable with English, that underpins the STEM fields.

‘While many hold that Mathematics constitutes the language of the physical sciences, technologies and engineering practices, it is an exceptional school that advances it as a language, comparable with English, that underpins the STEM fields.’

This separation between STEM subjects should not be surprising. The strong boundaries between subject areas (Bernstein, 1973) which are inherent in knowledge-led curricula models has generated a damaging ranking of subjects and consequent weighting of curriculum time. The elevation of STEM subjects is typically mirrored in a further marginalisation of the arts, a marginalisation that impoverishes not just the sciences but the whole curriculum, reducing breadth and balance. Further, it reduces the possibility of seeing natural, fertile and useful connections between social and natural sciences. Consider, for example, how the exquisite work of Michelangelo, Darwin, Chekhov and Merce Cunningham emerged. In their art, science, drama and dance practice, respectively, their interest in and close observation of human or plant biology, chemistry, human behaviour and computer technology were essential to their discoveries and contributions to society.

Engineers often argue that their field constitutes an inherently integrative, multilingual site and practice. Here mathematics, technologies and natural sciences interact with and draw on insights from the social sciences, such as the arts and psychology. Certainly, work with engineers to develop educational experiences for primary school children (Trowsdale, & Davies, 2024), and collaborations with colleagues in higher education make the case for the vital importance of these inherent connections informing curriculum design. The significance of the social sciences in engaging learners’ human interest is a common point of discussion. So, even if STEM were considered conceptually and practically robust, if the purpose of connecting STEM subjects in education is to develop scientifically minded, mathematically fluent, technologically skilled problem solvers, school curricula are not currently designed to achieve that goal. Different, more integrative curriculum models, like those being developed through STEAM education, which soften the boundaries and require learners to explore diverse, multiple and potentially conflicting perspectives to address complex ‘wicked problems’ are needed. These are curriculum designs which give voice to human, social, environmental and ethical concerns as vital dimensions of education. The Curriculum for Wales may be a space for such work, advocating cross-curricula designs, embracing learning areas which combine subjects and address real-world issues.

Just as there are plans to write further about art-making practices as helpful in STEAM curriculum design, we welcome the voices of practitioners and researchers to develop critical dialogue on STEAM curricula and education research.

References

Bernstein, B. (1973) On the classification and framing of educational knowledge, in Young, M. (ed.) Knowledge and Control: New directions for the sociology of education. London: Collier MacMillan, 47-69. 

Colucci-Gray, L., Trowsdale, J., Cooke, C. F., Davies, R., Burnard, P., & Gray, D. S. (2017). Reviewing the potential and challenges of developing STEAM education through creative pedagogies for 21st learning: How can school curricula be broadened towards a more responsive, dynamic, and inclusive form of education? British Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22452.76161

Trowsdale, J., & Davies, R. (2024), How a particular STEAM model is developing primary education: Lessons from the Teach-Make project (England). Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2022-0066