SMET education, then later, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) education, started in the late 1990s / early 2000s in the USA, as a way to fill an emerging economical skills shortage. Intended as “a fully integrated formal and informal, 5-19 teaching and learning programme.”
I have no further knowledge of how this impacted the US economy or how successful it has been; however, fast forward a few years and it arrives in the UK with very similar goals, of getting kids to connect the dots of their learning and impart the knowledge required to fill a skills shortage in the UK workforce.
The ideology behind STEM is great; however, for me, I have a few observations as a Design & Technology teacher. 1. When first launched in the UK, Design and Technology wasn't even a part of STEM. Surely you'd think that the 50% 'Technology and Engineering' aspect of the acronym would surely play a massive part of this new STEM thingy? It wasn't until the Design and Technology Association (DATA) battled and fought to be involved that any in-roads were made, this was mainly through CADCAM, programming and ICT based applications, and certainly not what I'd consider valuable hands on learning experiences.
D&T should be the driving force behind STEM; however, it always has been the ‘poor cousin’.
2. We now have STEAM (the addition of Art) into STEM and even in some schools, I've seen STREAM (with the addition of Religion). Once again, I have no personal experience of the success of STEAM and STREAM in these respective schools; however, I would question, at what point do we stop adding letters to STEM? See below.
3. At it's very core D&T is the application of Science, Maths (and just about every other subject) to create a practical outcome, and if taught correctly with explicit and discreet learning opportunities for students to investigate and explore learning from other areas of the curriculum, and, if D&T was “a fully integrated formal and informal, 5-19 teaching and learning programme” in a school, then there's no real need for STEM in the first place.
STEM has become a bit of a gimmick, a bolt on, a buzz word and a marketing tool, rather than being carefully planned from primary all the way through to secondary and beyond, I've seen schools just wanting to a 'project to fill time at the end of the school year in the maker space'. D&T or STEM is rarely planned from primary all the way through to the upper ends of secondary.
4. I believe that students just don’t transfer learning from one area of their study and automatically use it in other areas of their study. Up to a certain age, this ‘you are know using you maths / science / geography skills’ needs to be made explicit to youngsters. Some schools do interdisciplinary learning really well, and I salute the likes of High Tech High in the USA that build their curriculum around this concept, not just by grouping 'similar' subjects together, but by grouping completely 'opposing' subjects.
5. D&T has taken a hit by STEM. Essentially, being watered down in the process, often combined in ‘creative faculties’ and often taught by non-specialists.
6. UK education is a complete mess right now, and D&T is completely at the bottom of the pile. Successive governments have used D&T as a political football, so it should really come as no surprise that- a) Exam boards now place a greater focus on the production of a portfolio, and lesser focus (marks awarded) on functioning practical outcomes. b) The drop in student numbers taking D&T. c) The drop in teachers capable of delivering D&T. d) The missing middle. 40% of graduates leaving university do so with some form of STEM related aspect of their degree, but If STEM was supposed to fill a shortage gap, why is there still a shortage of engineers all across the world?
7. Do I use the term STEM? Yes, I do, simply because it is so popular, people understand it; however, I feel that it is not always done a great service- neither is D&T.
8. I know that the world is changing, technology is changing, but for almost every industry expert I talk to, they'd essentially appreciate youngsters that can work as part of a team, be able to understand a technical drawing and work with their hands.
I'm so grateful to be working in an international setting with a strong, steadfast team, with backing from senior leaders that we are doing the correct thing within our curriculum.
I know it’s not easy, but I’d please with all school leaders to ’stop being gimmicky’, ‘teach students basic skills’ and implement D&T from an early age, taught by specialists... then you can totally drop 'STEM’.