STEM Education: From Sputnik to Girl Scouts

Q4 Social Sciences
Jogaila Vaitekaitis
{"title":"STEM Education: From Sputnik to Girl Scouts","authors":"Jogaila Vaitekaitis","doi":"10.15388/actpaed.43.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The inconsistency of defining STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education is being addressed in this article. Seeing STEM education as having implications ranging from migration to workforce policies, it is vital to clarify its (inter)disciplinary structure and curriculum orientation. Using a literature review and analysis of documents, STEM education is being tracked from a post-sputnik era to more recent informal and private endeavors, revealing a multiplication of the STEM acronym and the diversification of its curriculum orientation. The findings confirm that there is no consensus on the exact scientific fields assigned to STEM, and the list of disciplines involved ranges from broad (including Social sciences, Humanities or Arts) to narrow (dominated by Natural and Formal sciences). The article implies that historical context and reforms in natural science education partly explain this inconsistency, as the subjects and their interdisciplinary relations are closely linked to overall curriculum orientation, which could be seen as cyclical in nature, swinging from child centered to labor market or subject centered curriculum, inviting to discuss modern science education not as singular STEM, but as plural STEMs viable to multiple pedagogical approaches, integration patterns and aims.","PeriodicalId":36797,"journal":{"name":"Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/actpaed.43.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The inconsistency of defining STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education is being addressed in this article. Seeing STEM education as having implications ranging from migration to workforce policies, it is vital to clarify its (inter)disciplinary structure and curriculum orientation. Using a literature review and analysis of documents, STEM education is being tracked from a post-sputnik era to more recent informal and private endeavors, revealing a multiplication of the STEM acronym and the diversification of its curriculum orientation. The findings confirm that there is no consensus on the exact scientific fields assigned to STEM, and the list of disciplines involved ranges from broad (including Social sciences, Humanities or Arts) to narrow (dominated by Natural and Formal sciences). The article implies that historical context and reforms in natural science education partly explain this inconsistency, as the subjects and their interdisciplinary relations are closely linked to overall curriculum orientation, which could be seen as cyclical in nature, swinging from child centered to labor market or subject centered curriculum, inviting to discuss modern science education not as singular STEM, but as plural STEMs viable to multiple pedagogical approaches, integration patterns and aims.
STEM教育:从人造卫星到女童子军
定义STEM(科学、技术、工程和数学)教育的不一致性将在本文中得到解决。鉴于STEM教育具有从移民到劳动力政策的各种影响,澄清其(跨)学科结构和课程定位至关重要。通过文献回顾和文件分析,STEM教育从后人造卫星时代一直追踪到最近的非正式和私人努力,揭示了STEM首字母缩略词的增加和课程方向的多样化。研究结果证实,对于分配给STEM的确切科学领域并没有达成共识,所涉及的学科范围从广泛(包括社会科学、人文科学或艺术)到狭窄(以自然科学和形式科学为主)。文章认为,历史背景和自然科学教育的改革在一定程度上解释了这种不一致,因为学科及其跨学科关系与整体课程取向密切相关,这可以被视为本质上的周期性,从以儿童为中心转向以劳动力市场或以学科为中心的课程,并不是将现代科学教育作为单一的STEM来讨论,而是作为多种教学方法可行的多元STEM来讨论。集成模式和目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia
Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信