Why STEM? Why now? Educating for technologies, or technologies for education?

Q2 Social Sciences Learning: Research and Practice Pub Date : 2018-07-03 DOI:10.1080/23735082.2018.1511275
M. Tan
{"title":"Why STEM? Why now? Educating for technologies, or technologies for education?","authors":"M. Tan","doi":"10.1080/23735082.2018.1511275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The STEM movement is a recent phenomenon receiving worldwide attention as the darling educational project for school systems and research centres. This interest has no doubt been fuelled by economic rationales of the supposed necessity of STEM for continued material wealth, and the claims that the future will require a different sort of expertise than what we currently possess. However, not as a conservative response, but as a critical one, it is important for us to become clearer about what it is that we would want students to learn. In addition, as researchers and practitioners, it is imperative that we distinguish hype from reality, if only because we need to learn from our collective institutional histories and claim some form of ownership over the direction of our work. Interdisciplinary STEM education does provide opportunities for educators to deeply confront such issues as the ethics of invention, and the distinction between the descriptive and normative disciplines. Yet, these gains are likely to be drowned out by the much louder clamour for flashy new things to fill new rooms with rearranged furniture. This commentary is intended as a reminder to the community to do the hard, unglamorous work required to make worthwhile learning happen.","PeriodicalId":52244,"journal":{"name":"Learning: Research and Practice","volume":"32 1","pages":"203 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning: Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2018.1511275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT The STEM movement is a recent phenomenon receiving worldwide attention as the darling educational project for school systems and research centres. This interest has no doubt been fuelled by economic rationales of the supposed necessity of STEM for continued material wealth, and the claims that the future will require a different sort of expertise than what we currently possess. However, not as a conservative response, but as a critical one, it is important for us to become clearer about what it is that we would want students to learn. In addition, as researchers and practitioners, it is imperative that we distinguish hype from reality, if only because we need to learn from our collective institutional histories and claim some form of ownership over the direction of our work. Interdisciplinary STEM education does provide opportunities for educators to deeply confront such issues as the ethics of invention, and the distinction between the descriptive and normative disciplines. Yet, these gains are likely to be drowned out by the much louder clamour for flashy new things to fill new rooms with rearranged furniture. This commentary is intended as a reminder to the community to do the hard, unglamorous work required to make worthwhile learning happen.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么干什么?为什么是现在?为技术而教育,还是为教育而技术?
STEM运动是最近受到全球关注的一种现象,是学校系统和研究中心的宠儿教育项目。毫无疑问,推动这种兴趣的经济理由是,人们认为STEM对于持续的物质财富是必要的,而且有人声称,未来将需要一种不同于我们目前拥有的专业知识。然而,不是作为保守的回应,而是作为一种批判的回应,对我们来说,更清楚地了解我们希望学生学习什么是很重要的。此外,作为研究人员和实践者,我们必须区分炒作和现实,如果只是因为我们需要从我们的集体制度历史中学习,并要求对我们工作方向的某种形式的所有权。跨学科的STEM教育确实为教育工作者提供了深入面对诸如发明伦理,以及描述性和规范性学科之间区别等问题的机会。然而,这些收益很可能会被更响亮的呼声淹没,人们要求用重新布置的家具来填充新房间。这篇评论的目的是提醒社区去做那些艰难而乏味的工作,以实现有价值的学习。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Learning: Research and Practice
Learning: Research and Practice Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Speak like a pro: boosting language proficiency, engagement, and reducing anxiety, in virtual reality through innovative media transition with MondlyVR and VirtualSpeech Promoting pre-service teacher development through intervention-based action research Better learning and practice with teacher corrective feedback in higher education: a lesson from Thailand Factors influencing undergraduate students’ engagement in online learning: a PLS-SEM approach Learning journal 2.0: refinements for greater heights
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1