The STEM Initiative: Constraints and Challenges.

There is considerable national interest in STEM initiatives, but yet there is little discussion concerning what STEM means in terms of a curriculum concept to be applied to school programming. This article focuses on STEM as a curriculum concept. First, STEM programming is discussed in terms of separate subjects, correlated and broad fields curriculum models. The issue of subject structure is examined. A distinction also is made between the four STEM subjects in terms of formal and applicative uses of knowledge. Second, some practical programming issues are discussed. These include the almost exclusive focus on science and math to the exclusion of technology and engineering; the challenge of serving multiple student populations; and the issue of what to do with the “T” in STEM. A concluding section suggests ways that the STEM initiative can be conceptualized in order to realize its considerable potential to achieve curriculum reformulation. Dennis R. Herschbach is an Associate Professor in the Department of Education Policy Studies in the College of Education, University of Maryland, College Park. He can be reached at drhersch@umd.edu. The STEM Initiative 97

[1]  Senta B. Raizen.  Technology Education in the Classroom: Understanding the Designed World. , 1995 .

[2]  Judi Repman,et al.  Is Content Instruction , 2003 .

[3]  Todd R. Kelley,et al.  Two Approaches to Engineering Design:Observations in sTEm Education. , 2010 .

[4]  Edward C. Warburton,et al.  Teaching technology. , 1978, MD medical newsmagazine.

[5]  S. Dasgupta.  Technology and Creativity , 2006, Woman with a Movie Camera.

[6]  Pasi Sahlberg,et al.  Tough choices or tough times: The report on the new commission on the skills of the American workforce , 2008 .

[7]  Scott J. Cech.  Career Skills Said to Get Short Shrift: U.S. Seen Lagging in Melding Preparation for College, Work. , 2009 .

[8]  W. Norton Grubb,et al.  Education and Training for Work , 1991 .

[9]  L. Katehi,et al.  Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. , 2009 .

[10]  Barbara Ischinger.  Tough choices or tough times , 2008 .

[11]  A. M. White.  The Process of Education , 1994 .

[12]  Laurence Batchalder,et al.  Technically speaking , 1984, IEEE Spectrum.

[13]  John D. McNeil.  Curriculum: The Teacher's Initiative , 1998 .

[14]  John Visser.  Engineering Your Future , 1996 .

[15]  Arnold Pacey,et al.  Meaning in Technology , 1999 .

[16]  Aurelio Peccei,et al.  Before it is too late , 1984 .

[17]  V. Rich.  Personal communication , 1989, Nature.

[18]  Scott O’Reilly.  The Structure of Thinking , 2003 .

[19]  D. Herschbach.  Technology as Knowledge: Implications for Instruction. , 1995 .

[20]  A. E. Winship.  American Teachers , 1928 .

[21]  Patricia S. Moyer-Packenham,et al.  Participation by STEM Faculty in Mathematics and Science Partnership Activities for Teachers , 2009 .

[22]  N. Augustine.  Rising Above The Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future , 2006 .

[23]  William C. Oakes,et al.  Engineering Your Future , 1998 .

[24]  Педагогика.  National Center on Education and the Economy , 2010 .

[25]  John D. McNeil,et al.  Curriculum: A Comprehensive Introduction , 1997 .

[26]  Robert C. Wicklein.  Five Good Reasons for Engineering as the Focus for Technology Education , 2006 .

[27]  Cristián Cox.  Tough choices or tough times: seeing with one eye , 2008 .

[28]  M. Sanders,et al.  Integrative STEM Education: Primer , 2009 .

[29]  Robert C. Wicklein.  Five Good Reasons for Engineering Design as the Focus for Technology Education: In My 25+ Years as an Educator in This Field, I Have Rarely Discussed My Profession with Individuals Who Have an Accurate Understanding of Our Educational Purpose , 2006 .

[30]  Clifton P. Campbell.  Education and Training for Work: Volume 1-Planning Programs , 1996 .

[31]  Henryk Skolimowski,et al.  The Structure of Thinking in Technology , 1966 .

[32]  Elizabeth L. Useem,et al.  The Struggle for the American Curriculum: 1893-1958 , 1987 .

[33]  Jeffrey J. Kuenzi.  Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: Background, Federal Policy, and Legislative Action , 2008 .

[34]  A. Feenberg.  Transforming Technology: A Critical Theory Revisited , 2002 .

[35]  J. Kolodner.  Facilitating the Learning of Design Practices: Lessons Learned from an Inquiry into Science Education. , 2002 .