削减未来技能的STEM:超越英国的STEM与艺术二分法

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Heidi Ashton
{"title":"削减未来技能的STEM:超越英国的STEM与艺术二分法","authors":"Heidi Ashton","doi":"10.1177/14740222231156893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For the last decade education policy in England has been underpinned by a dichotomisation of education into STEM versus Arts. The rationale is that STEM graduates gain more lucrative employment via the desirability of the ‘STEM skills’ which it is stated are increasingly in demand and imperative for economic prosperity. Through a literature review and analysis of policy documents and reports this paper examines evidence regarding the assumptions that are inherent in this claim. In doing so it reveals that the rationale for this approach is deeply flawed, particularly in relation to future skills needs. This raises questions not only for the current direction of policy but fundamentally the notion of STEM as a useful and meaningful acronym in this context. The evidence instead calls for an integrated, dynamic and strategic approach to education policy that fundamentally moves beyond the false dichotomy of STEM versus Arts.","PeriodicalId":45787,"journal":{"name":"Arts and Humanities in Higher Education","volume":"22 1","pages":"148 - 163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cutting the STEM of future skills: beyond the STEM vs art dichotomy in England\",\"authors\":\"Heidi Ashton\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14740222231156893\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For the last decade education policy in England has been underpinned by a dichotomisation of education into STEM versus Arts. The rationale is that STEM graduates gain more lucrative employment via the desirability of the ‘STEM skills’ which it is stated are increasingly in demand and imperative for economic prosperity. Through a literature review and analysis of policy documents and reports this paper examines evidence regarding the assumptions that are inherent in this claim. In doing so it reveals that the rationale for this approach is deeply flawed, particularly in relation to future skills needs. This raises questions not only for the current direction of policy but fundamentally the notion of STEM as a useful and meaningful acronym in this context. The evidence instead calls for an integrated, dynamic and strategic approach to education policy that fundamentally moves beyond the false dichotomy of STEM versus Arts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arts and Humanities in Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"148 - 163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arts and Humanities in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14740222231156893\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arts and Humanities in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14740222231156893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的十年里,英国的教育政策一直以教育分为STEM和Arts的二分法为基础。其基本原理是,STEM毕业生通过对“STEM技能”的渴望获得更有利可图的就业机会,而STEM技能的需求日益增长,对经济繁荣至关重要。通过对政策文件和报告的文献回顾和分析,本文检查了有关这一主张中固有假设的证据。在这样做的过程中,它揭示了这种方法的基本原理存在严重缺陷,特别是与未来的技能需求有关。这不仅对当前的政策方向提出了问题,而且从根本上说,在这种情况下,STEM作为一个有用和有意义的缩写的概念也受到了质疑。相反,证据要求对教育政策采取综合的、动态的和战略性的方法,从根本上超越STEM与艺术的错误二分法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cutting the STEM of future skills: beyond the STEM vs art dichotomy in England
For the last decade education policy in England has been underpinned by a dichotomisation of education into STEM versus Arts. The rationale is that STEM graduates gain more lucrative employment via the desirability of the ‘STEM skills’ which it is stated are increasingly in demand and imperative for economic prosperity. Through a literature review and analysis of policy documents and reports this paper examines evidence regarding the assumptions that are inherent in this claim. In doing so it reveals that the rationale for this approach is deeply flawed, particularly in relation to future skills needs. This raises questions not only for the current direction of policy but fundamentally the notion of STEM as a useful and meaningful acronym in this context. The evidence instead calls for an integrated, dynamic and strategic approach to education policy that fundamentally moves beyond the false dichotomy of STEM versus Arts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Arts and Humanities in Higher Education
Arts and Humanities in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Arts and Humanities in Higher Education seeks to: Publish high quality articles that bring critical research to the fore and stimulate debate. Serve the community of arts and humanities educators internationally, by publishing significant opinion and research into contemporary issues of teaching and learning within the domain. These will include enquiries into policy, the curriculum and appropriate forms of assessment, as well as developments in method such as electronic modes of scholarship and course delivery.
×
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