Theorizing the nexus of STEAM practice

ABSTRACT Recent advances in arts education policy, as outlined in the latest National Core Arts Standards, advocate for bringing digital media into the arts education classroom. The promise of such Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM)–based approaches is that, by coupling Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and the arts, new understandings and artifacts emerge that transcend either discipline. Evidence of this can be seen through fundamental shifts in both fields; in the arts, artists are expanding the creative potential for design through computational flexibility, which affords artists the ability to exceed the limitations of their tools. The infusion of the arts into STEM has shown to be equally transformative, with the emergence of tools and communities that not only engender new content understandings but also invite participation from populations historically underrepresented in STEM fields. Drawing on over a decade of research at the intersection of the arts, creativity, and new technologies from the Creativity Labs at Indiana University, this article theorizes the learning that takes place at effective couplings of STEAM to assist today's educators in realizing the potential for transformative experiences for learners of all levels. This article provides a synthesis of this past work across two compelling cases of STEAM-based tools, materials, and activities (i.e., the media-rich programming environment Scratch as well as the work the LilyPad Arduino used to create electronic textiles), incorporating findings from more than 50 peer-reviewed papers and books, and conceptually outlines an approach to “gathering STEAM” in arts education classrooms today. Implications are explored for policy makers in teacher education to think about preservice curriculum and field experiences; policy makers in arts education to think about tools needed in classrooms today; as well as how art education can play a critical role in STEM disciplines and offer solutions to address STEM pipeline challenges. Such efforts extend current and prior discussions in the arts education landscape about the use of new technologies, and draw our attention to how new technologies can be leveraged for artistic expression.

[1]  Michael Cole,et al.  Between Discourse and Schema: Reformulating a Cultural-Historical Approach to Culture and Mind. , 1995 .

[2]  J. Lochhead,et al.  Student conceptions of simple circuits , 1980 .

[3]  James W. Nilsson,et al.  Electric Circuits , 1983 .

[4]  Josée Dostie,et al.  Repurposing CRISPR/Cas9 for in situ functional assays , 2013, Genes & development.

[5]  Kylie Peppler,et al.  Hands On, Hands Off: Gendered Access in Crafting and Electronics Practices , 2014 .

[6]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Programming by choice: urban youth learning programming with scratch , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[7]  K. Peppler.  Media Arts: Arts Education for a Digital Age , 2010 .

[8]  Jennifer Lawrence,et al.  Communication in the Age of Virtual Reality. , 1997 .

[9]  K. Peppler,et al.  From SuperGoo to Scratch: exploring creative digital media production in informal learning , 2007 .

[10]  R. Connell,et al.  Hegemonic Masculinity , 2005 .

[11]  Katherine L. McNeill,et al.  The Impact of High School Science Teachers’ Beliefs, Curricular Enactments and Experience on Student Learning During an Inquiry-based Urban Ecology Curriculum , 2013 .

[12]  Elisabeth Soep,et al.  Youth Radio and the Pedagogy of Collegiality. , 2005 .

[13]  S. Wortham.  Youth, Technology, and DIY: Developing Participatory Competencies in Creative Media Production , 2010 .

[14]  Deborah A. Fields,et al.  Electronic Textiles as Disruptive Designs: Supporting and Challenging Maker Activities in Schools , 2014 .

[15]  Eric Rosenbaum,et al.  Scratch: programming for all , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[16]  J. Rowsell,et al.  Artifactual Literacies: Every Object Tells a Story , 2010 .

[17]  J. Butler.  Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity , 1990 .

[18]  Jonathan Steuer,et al.  Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence , 1992 .

[19]  Louisa Penfold.  Art as experience , 2017 .

[20]  K. Peppler,et al.  High tech programmers in low-income communities: Seeding reform in a community technology center , 2007 .

[21]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  Developing a design culture in a computer clubhouse: the role of local practices and mediators , 2008, ICLS.

[22]  David A. Gillam,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2012 .

[23]  G. Kress.  Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy , 1997 .

[24]  Jane Chu Prey,et al.  Fostering Gender Diversity in Computing , 2013, Computer.

[25]  Brian K. Smith,et al.  Design and computational flexibility , 2006, Digit. Creativity.

[26]  K. Peppler.  New Creativity Paradigms , 2014 .

[27]  Sabine Seymour.  Functional Aesthetics: Visions in Fashionable Technology , 2011 .

[28]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  The computer clubhouse: A place for youth , 2009 .

[29]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas , 1981 .

[30]  M. Greene.  Releasing the Imagination , 2011 .

[31]  Carrie Paechter,et al.  Masculinities and femininities as communities of practice , 2003 .

[32]  Margaret Vaughn.  Artifactual literacies: every object tells a story , 2012 .

[33]  Patrick N. Foster.  Industrial Arts/Technology Education as a Social Study: The Original Intent?. , 1995 .

[34]  Leah Buechley,et al.  Textile messages : dispatches from the world of e-textiles and education , 2013 .

[35]  D. Lemish,et al.  The Routledge international handbook of children, adolescents and media , 2013 .

[36]  Mary C. Beaudry,et al.  Findings: The Material Culture of Needlework and Sewing , 2007 .

[37]  Jeannette M. Wing.  An introduction to computer science for non-majors using principles of computation , 2007, SIGCSE.

[38]  Leah Buechley,et al.  LilyPad in the wild: how hardware's long tail is supporting new engineering and design communities , 2010, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[39]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  High Tech Programmers in Low-Income Communities: Creating a Computer Culture in a Community Technology Center , 2007 .

[40]  Ann L. Brown.  Motivation to learn and understand: On taking charge of one's own learning. , 1988 .

[41]  Allan Fisher,et al.  Unlocking the Clubhouse : Women in Computing by Allan Fisher , 2015 .

[42]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2013 .

[43]  M. Resnick,et al.  Designing for Tinkerability , 2013 .

[44]  Ron Scollon,et al.  Mediated Discourse: The nexus of practice , 2001 .

[45]  Kylie Peppler,et al.  Short Circuits: Crafting e-Puppets with DIY Electronics , 2014 .

[46]  Kylie A. Peppler,et al.  STEAM-Powered Computing Education: Using E-Textiles to Integrate the Arts and STEM , 2013, Computer.

[47]  Kylie Peppler,et al.  New Opportunities for Interest-Driven Arts Learning in a Digital Age. , 2013 .

[48]  Dan Davies,et al.  The Founders of Industrial Arts in the US , 1995 .

[49]  Amon Millner,et al.  A toolkit for tinkering with tangibles & connecting communities , 2011, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.