STEM vs. STEAM...do you know the difference?

The words STEM and STEAM are tossed around quite freely within learning communities, but do we really know what they mean or how to implement them effectively?  Why should we know these terms?  How does STEM or STEAM impact the way we educate today's youths?

I would like to offer my personal working definition, for each of the following terms:

Science - an explanation of how the world and its systems originated and continue to coexist

Technology - resources that make existing tasks or jobs easier

Engineering - an understanding how things work together

Mathematics - formulas, numbers and calculations

Art - the creative expression of individuals

STEM Education - curriculum that incorporates science, technology, engineering, and math as an integral part of the program of studies

STEAM Education - curriculum that incorporates science, technology, engineering, art and math as an integral part of the program of studies

The distinction between Science and Engineering - science seeks to explain the origins of behavior (social), life (plant, animal, human), and physical substances (elements), while engineering seeks to understand the mechanics of how things work together

Interdisciplinary teaching and learning - instructional practices that involve more than one discipline in the implementation of lesson plans or units

Now, let's see how the "experts" define these terms:

Science - an explanation of how the world and its systems originated and continue to coexist

According to NASA Space Place science is "curiosity in thoughtful action about the world and how it behaves."

Technology - resources that make existing tasks or jobs easier

Merriam-Webster defines technology as improvements in technical processes that increase productivity of machines and eliminates manual operations or operations done by older machines.

Engineering - an understanding how things work together

The website Live Science defines engineering as "the application of science and math to solve problems."

Mathematics - formulas, numbers and calculations

Dr. Robert H. Lewis of Fordham University states that mathematics is "about processes."

Art - the creative expression of individuals

In a recent Huffington Post article by UVA student, Andrew Burrill posted in April 2016, several people were asked to defined art.  Vanessa Ochs, Creative Writing Fellowship Recipient from National Endowment for the Arts defines art as "an alternative world, one we create that stands in contrast to the world we regularly live in, which is messy, unplanned, unedited, uninspired, unfocused, draining, largely immoral...Art is the best of our imaginings, shaped to share."

STEM Education - curriculum that incorporates science, technology, engineering, and math as an integral part of the program of studies

The website Live Science defines STEM Education as "a curriculum based on the idea of educating students in four specific disciplines--science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--in an interdisciplinary and applied approach."

STEAM Education - curriculum that incorporates science, technology, engineering, art and math as an integral part of the program of studies

According to steamedu.com, STEAM Education is "science and technology interpreted through engineering and the arts, all based in mathematical elements."

The distinction between Science and Engineering - science seeks to explain the origins of behavior (social), life (plant, animal, human), and physical substances (elements), while engineering seeks to understand the mechanics of how things work together

In general, science seeks to create the ideal conditions to examine how things will potentially work, while engineering seeks to determine how things will work in the real world.

Interdisciplinary teaching and learning - instructional practices that involve more than one discipline in the implementation of lesson plans or units

My working definition seems to support the most accepted definition of this term.

After researching these terms and comparing them to my working definitions, I feel that I have a better understanding of the actual meanings, and how they serve to change the dynamics of learning communities. 

How about you?  Are you ready? Do you STEM or do you STEAM?

My Curriculum Orientation

In an previous post, I discussed my educational philosophy and alluded to the existence of a relationship between curriculum and educational philosophies. Jenkins (2009) created an instrument to measure modified curriculum orientation.  After answering a series of questions using a Likert-scale format, this tool helps educators to identify his or her curriculum orientation. Interestingly, my results revealed an orientation toward Humanistic curriculum.

Those who prescribe to this particular curriculum orientation believe that "the purpose of education is to provide students with opportunities to foster their personal development as unique individuals."  Sound familiar?  This orientation is closely aligned to my educational philosophy of Progressivism.  So, now that I have this information (which I believe to be pretty spot on), what do I do with it?  How can these orientations be used to guide my role as an instructional leader?

Relationships.

This is the first word that comes to mind when I think of my professional practice as it relates to my educational philosophy and curriculum orientation. The primary responsibility of an educational leader is building and preserving relationships.  Relationships with students.  Relationships with teachers and staff.  Relationships with families.  Relationships will all stakeholders.    Think of it as the foundation of a great learning community.  

A large part of my career has been spent building, maintaining, and preserving the relationships of the stakeholders with whom I interact on a daily basis.  It is what I enjoy most about what I do!  So, I'm not surprised by the results of these inventories.  I strongly believe in developing the whole child.  There is a place for assessment, rigor, data, and the like, but in the end, education is about helping people to grow emotionally, socially, culturally, and cognitively. It's about the complete person, and this should never be forgotten.

Let's Talk About Grading!

Have you ever had a massive pile of papers sitting on your desk, and the quarter is quickly coming to an end only to open your email and find a "friendly reminder" that grades are due by 8 am the next day?  If you haven't, I have! While l know that grading papers is a part of my job responsibilities, somehow it always seems to become this massive chore that I've put off until the last minute.  Whenever I sit down to tackle this daunting task, I sometimes ponder the idea of grading and what exactly the letter or percentage will mean to my students.  

I'm a Special Education teacher that supports the English department, so I often give feedback on students' writing, and I have often believed this to be so much more meaningful than a number on a paper. But, let's be real. Students...and parents want to see a grade...an actual number to indicate how a student has fared according to the grading scale. Shouldn't we be more concerned with skill acquisition vice whether or not a student has achieved a certain grade? Shouldn't our focus be on developing thoughtful and reflective learners?  Don't future employers want to know if a student can think critically or analyze a problem?  And herein lies the problem with grading as we know it.

Recently I completed the "Fifteen Fixes for Broken Grades" inventory.  This tool helped to highlight many of the issues involving grading practices.  In particular, the following fixes would be acceptable to me with certain changes:

• Don't include student behaviors (effort, participation, adherence to class rules, etc.) in grades; include only achievement
• Change:  Student behaviors can be included in grades, if a self-evaluation tool was used by students to assess their behavior. The results of this tool can be used to support a grade for behavior.
• Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner
• Change:  Work that is submitted after an predetermined time frame, should receive a reduced mark, especially if student support was offered but not accepted.
• Don't include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement or use "I" for Incomplete or Insufficient Evidence
• Change:  Remove the phrase "when evidence is missing."  If work has not been submitted and opportunities for reassessing have been presented, but not accepted by the student, a grade of zero is appropriate.

Grading practices are tricky, especially when the ultimate goal is to be fair and accurate in our reporting of student achievement.  I believe that reassessment and adequate supports are both integral to a student's success.  As a professional learning community, it is our responsibility to find the balance between fair grading practices and presenting authentic opportunities for students to demonstrate mastery of learning.

If You Plan Well, They Will Learn Well

I'll admit that the words curriculum planning have been somewhat an elusive term for me, since entering the field of education.  Having taken the nontraditional route into teaching, I can remember, from my first teaching assignment, being bombarded by so many acronyms and other "teacher-speak" terms that I wasn't always sure if I even knew what I was supposed to be doing half the time.  In all honesty, I'm not 100% sure what I will learn from a Curriculum Leadership P-12 graduate level course either, but I'm hopeful that when all is said and done, I will at least be able to recognize good instruction across all content areas.

In the article titled, "Thinking About the Elements of Curriculum Design," the phrase "...plan well so students can learn well" really resonated with me.  I mean, it only makes sense that if one puts in time to develop high-quality curriculum, then the results will be positive.  Yet, over the years I have seen many counterexamples to this school of thought.  From teachers whose planning consisted of making sure to have just the right amount of math packets copied each week so as not to require any amount of real teaching to teachers who plan with the end in mind and constantly reflect to make sure that students are making progress toward meaningful goals.  So, yeah...the concept is simple, but why do so many educators struggle with planning and executing quality curriculum?  Is it related to the content?  Is it related to how long an educator has been in the field?  Why does it seem as if many of the educators I've met over the years have somehow forgotten that what is best for the student is what is best?

It's obviously that there are many layers to curriculum, and perhaps therein lies the problem.  Maybe no one really knows what it truly is or what they do know is antiquated or jaded by past experiences.