If you are looking for a sure fire way to gain support for your education initiative, look no further than these four letters: STEM. The letters stand for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math and while there is still a vigorous debate among educators about their meaning and import, policy makers and foundations are certain that the future of a healthy american education system (and by proxy, economy) depends on focusing on these four areas.
But why STEM, why now? It is largely a reaction to the now infamous PISA rankings, which place American students 26th in math and 21st in science as compared to their global counterparts. There is a perception that we were once great (we were first on the moon, dammit!) and now we are on a steep and steady decline. Worst of all, with China, India, and the Scandinavian countries excelling in the STEM fields, it won’t be too long before our economy becomes obsolete. We want to get back to the glory days. On the other hand, it's not all vanity. It is true that as we move deeper into the 21st century the demand for science and math related jobs but especially tech related jobs will increase and we won't have the citizenry to meet that demand.
Therefore the goals of the STEM movement are two-fold: Increase student competence in these four areas and increase interest in STEM related careers.
Unfortunately, as it is applied now, STEM education more or less translates to ‘more rigorous standards and accountability’ (aka more tests!). STEM education perpetuates a flawed understanding of student motivation. It is as if we think that telling students that this is ‘really important’ will wake them up and get them jazzed about mitosis and trigonometry. But an even more substantial problem is that the term has become borderline meaningless. This is because administrators and educators, perceiving the importance of the STEM buzzword, have slapped it on to their traditional curriculum and programs without making any substantive changes. Can you blame them? Their funding depends on it, and in their minds they’ve always cared about science and math. In essence, what many of them are hearing is that they need to focus more rigorously on science and math except this time with the help of iPads and laptops (21st century!).
Within this formulation of STEM, there is little doubt that students will continue to devalue science, math, and engineering both in their schooling and potential careers. However, I believe that hidden within the STEM ethos exists a burning desire that with a bit of reformulation could lead to substantive change. The key lies within the ‘E’ or engineering. Engineering is not like math or science because it is less about understanding things and more about making things, i.e., how do we make things that satisfy needs and that work reliably. The difficulty is that engineering is a very technical and inflexible subject, and for good reason or else bridges would fail and engines wouldn’t run. These high standards are why we don't have third grade engineers. Yet we need students from a very young age to understand the core processes of engineering, which include sound research, collaboration, critical thinking, creative thinking, prototyping, iteration, feedback, and project management.
Luckily, alongside the STEM movement there has been another movement in education: Design Thinking or the collaborative and creative process of designing effective solutions for people's needs. Design Thinking curriculum embodies the core engineering process of making except it also borrows from the social sciences (ethnography), humanities (empathy and perspective taking), and the arts (visualizing ideas and role play). What is beautiful about DT curriculum is that it can put the emphasis on making and designing at a very young age. Most importantly, it is the embodiment of the common adage, 'learning happens through doing'. The work feels authentic and important, which motivates students to seek out information (e.g., science and math concepts!) that will make them better designers and potentially engineers.
But why STEM, why now? It is largely a reaction to the now infamous PISA rankings, which place American students 26th in math and 21st in science as compared to their global counterparts. There is a perception that we were once great (we were first on the moon, dammit!) and now we are on a steep and steady decline. Worst of all, with China, India, and the Scandinavian countries excelling in the STEM fields, it won’t be too long before our economy becomes obsolete. We want to get back to the glory days. On the other hand, it's not all vanity. It is true that as we move deeper into the 21st century the demand for science and math related jobs but especially tech related jobs will increase and we won't have the citizenry to meet that demand.
Therefore the goals of the STEM movement are two-fold: Increase student competence in these four areas and increase interest in STEM related careers.
Unfortunately, as it is applied now, STEM education more or less translates to ‘more rigorous standards and accountability’ (aka more tests!). STEM education perpetuates a flawed understanding of student motivation. It is as if we think that telling students that this is ‘really important’ will wake them up and get them jazzed about mitosis and trigonometry. But an even more substantial problem is that the term has become borderline meaningless. This is because administrators and educators, perceiving the importance of the STEM buzzword, have slapped it on to their traditional curriculum and programs without making any substantive changes. Can you blame them? Their funding depends on it, and in their minds they’ve always cared about science and math. In essence, what many of them are hearing is that they need to focus more rigorously on science and math except this time with the help of iPads and laptops (21st century!).
Within this formulation of STEM, there is little doubt that students will continue to devalue science, math, and engineering both in their schooling and potential careers. However, I believe that hidden within the STEM ethos exists a burning desire that with a bit of reformulation could lead to substantive change. The key lies within the ‘E’ or engineering. Engineering is not like math or science because it is less about understanding things and more about making things, i.e., how do we make things that satisfy needs and that work reliably. The difficulty is that engineering is a very technical and inflexible subject, and for good reason or else bridges would fail and engines wouldn’t run. These high standards are why we don't have third grade engineers. Yet we need students from a very young age to understand the core processes of engineering, which include sound research, collaboration, critical thinking, creative thinking, prototyping, iteration, feedback, and project management.
Luckily, alongside the STEM movement there has been another movement in education: Design Thinking or the collaborative and creative process of designing effective solutions for people's needs. Design Thinking curriculum embodies the core engineering process of making except it also borrows from the social sciences (ethnography), humanities (empathy and perspective taking), and the arts (visualizing ideas and role play). What is beautiful about DT curriculum is that it can put the emphasis on making and designing at a very young age. Most importantly, it is the embodiment of the common adage, 'learning happens through doing'. The work feels authentic and important, which motivates students to seek out information (e.g., science and math concepts!) that will make them better designers and potentially engineers.
In a later post, I will outline in more detail my ideal Design Thinking curriculum, but suffice it to say that the first task is communicating to students that they are already designers of their world. Whether it is designing their outfit for the day, their next meal, the best route to school, a game, a persuasive essay, or a bridge made out of toothpicks, the process is the same: research, ideate, create, evaluate, iterate. The key is becoming aware of the process and being able to modify it for the task at hand. For educators, the key is getting students to apply this process within the content areas of science, math, humanities, and arts. In terms of the STEM goals, if schools can engage students in meaningful design problems where science, tech, math, and engineering content and skills are essential then competence and interest emerge naturally.
STEM curriculum, as it is commonly formulated, is nearly a meaningless label and is likely to maintain the status quo of more testing and less doing. Design Thinking curriculum is authentic, flexible, interest driven, career oriented, hands on, interdisciplinary, and while it is not guaranteed to increase test scores it is a guaranteed way to add meaning and value to teachers and students’ lives.
TL;DR - STEM education is popular but often misguided in its efforts to reinvigorate students interest in math and science. Yet, within the context of 'engineering' (the 'E' in STEM), there is a clear desire to have students create. Design Thinking curriculum can fulfill this desire and has the added benefit of being applicable across many contexts and subjects.
Design Thinking Curriculum Resources
STEM curriculum, as it is commonly formulated, is nearly a meaningless label and is likely to maintain the status quo of more testing and less doing. Design Thinking curriculum is authentic, flexible, interest driven, career oriented, hands on, interdisciplinary, and while it is not guaranteed to increase test scores it is a guaranteed way to add meaning and value to teachers and students’ lives.
TL;DR - STEM education is popular but often misguided in its efforts to reinvigorate students interest in math and science. Yet, within the context of 'engineering' (the 'E' in STEM), there is a clear desire to have students create. Design Thinking curriculum can fulfill this desire and has the added benefit of being applicable across many contexts and subjects.
Design Thinking Curriculum Resources
- Seven Ways of Design Thinking, A Teacher’s Resource, IDESIGN
- Frog Creates an Open-Source Guide to Design Thinking, Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan
- Want to Help Kids Solve Problems? Have them Design Their Own Solutions, Dave Sherwin, Co.Design
- Design Thinking for Educators, IDEO’s Toolkit
- Hacking the Classroom: Beyond Designer Thinking, User Generated Education [Blog]
- Design Thinking Overview, The Nueva School