STEM needs to become "STEMM"

[Anonymous]

While the emphasis on STEM (science/technology/engineering and math) is surely important, educators must also emphasize music (the added "m" in STEMM).

https://m.mic.com/articles/110628/13-scientific-studies-prove-music-lessons-were-the-best-thing-your-parents-did-for-you#.xtZ9GVclc

Don't you agree?

[Anonymous]

There's already been a movement to expand STEM to STEAM. The A is for Arts, including music. I agree.

[Anonymous]

I don't agree. Once you start adding the arts and music in, please do not forget about English or History. I'm sick of illiterate coworkers here at my engineering job.

Maybe we should just emphasize well rounded people?

[Anonymous]

Nonsense. STEM is a focus area we need.

That's not to imply the other things (Art, Music, PE, Language, etc) are not important to develop a well rounded person, but if you try to focus on everything, you focus on nothing.

[Anonymous]

No. All the parts that make up the acronym STEM are related. Simple adding an unrelated field that you like, and make the acronym more amenable to you, defeats the purpose.

[Anonymous]

^ *simply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nonsense. STEM is a focus area we need.

That's not to imply the other things (Art, Music, PE, Language, etc) are not important to develop a well rounded person, but if you try to focus on everything, you focus on nothing.

Yes. I heard STEAM the other day and thought adding art was ridiculous. Defeats the purpose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nonsense. STEM is a focus area we need.

That's not to imply the other things (Art, Music, PE, Language, etc) are not important to develop a well rounded person, but if you try to focus on everything, you focus on nothing.

+100

[Anonymous]

As a scientist, I believe the focus should be shifted to better reading, writing and math. There is much too much emphasis at the elementary level on arts and science. They distract from the sheer amount of hours that are needed to master a much higher level of reading comprehension, vocabulary and mathematical fluency than is currently acquired at those ages.

Because we don't need dumb scientists, or dumb professionals in any category. I've known too many PhD students who couldn't interpret data correctly, which should never happen at that level.

Critical thinking skills must be built very early on, and they come with a rigorous study of reading, writing and math. I fully support arts and science at the middle school and high school level, when children are mature enough to understand them. But elementary school science and arts are mostly a means of entertaining children: I can't count the times I've walked in as a visiting scientist or art room parent volunteer, and most kids cannot grasp the deeper concepts that the teachers are trying to ram down their throats (apart from the ones who have scientist parents).

So the buzz word should be RWM: reading, writing an math.

(And don't get me started on the tripe they call books these days. Schools should expose children to much better quality books, with complex syntax and higher-order vocabulary.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nonsense. STEM is a focus area we need.

That's not to imply the other things (Art, Music, PE, Language, etc) are not important to develop a well rounded person, but if you try to focus on everything, you focus on nothing.

+100

+200

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
As a scientist, I believe the focus should be shifted to better reading, writing and math. There is much too much emphasis at the elementary level on arts and science. They distract from the sheer amount of hours that are needed to master a much higher level of reading comprehension, vocabulary and mathematical fluency than is currently acquired at those ages.

Because we don't need dumb scientists, or dumb professionals in any category. I've known too many PhD students who couldn't interpret data correctly, which should never happen at that level.

Critical thinking skills must be built very early on, and they come with a rigorous study of reading, writing and math. I fully support arts and science at the middle school and high school level, when children are mature enough to understand them. But elementary school science and arts are mostly a means of entertaining children: I can't count the times I've walked in as a visiting scientist or art room parent volunteer, and most kids cannot grasp the deeper concepts that the teachers are trying to ram down their throats (apart from the ones who have scientist parents).

So the buzz word should be RWM: reading, writing an math.

(And don't get me started on the tripe they call books these days. Schools should expose children to much better quality books, with complex syntax and higher-order vocabulary.)

Regarding quality books, my youngest D.C. came from school with a book suggested by the librarian: a comic book called Professor Underpants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While the emphasis on STEM (science/technology/engineering and math) is surely important, educators must also emphasize music (the added "m" in STEMM).

https://m.mic.com/articles/110628/13-scientific-studies-prove-music-lessons-were-the-best-thing-your-parents-did-for-you#.xtZ9GVclc

Don't you agree?

No no no

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While the emphasis on STEM (science/technology/engineering and math) is surely important, educators must also emphasize music (the added "m" in STEMM).

https://m.mic.com/articles/110628/13-scientific-studies-prove-music-lessons-were-the-best-thing-your-parents-did-for-you#.xtZ9GVclc

Don't you agree?

when you say "emphasize music" do you mean p;ay an instrument? This costs money everywhere -- it's not free. We had to rent a musical instrument (won't mention which one) but it was rent to buy and about $3600 as I recall. Only some kids can do this.
Also even if the instruments were free only some kids will take to it -- You can't force music down students' throats any more than you can STEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While the emphasis on STEM (science/technology/engineering and math) is surely important, educators must also emphasize music (the added "m" in STEMM).

https://m.mic.com/articles/110628/13-scientific-studies-prove-music-lessons-were-the-best-thing-your-parents-did-for-you#.xtZ9GVclc

Don't you agree?

when you say "emphasize music" do you mean p;ay an instrument? This costs money everywhere -- it's not free. We had to rent a musical instrument (won't mention which one) but it was rent to buy and about $3600 as I recall. Only some kids can do this.
Also even if the instruments were free only some kids will take to it -- You can't force music down students' throats any more than you can STEM.

*play

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
As a scientist, I believe the focus should be shifted to better reading, writing and math. There is much too much emphasis at the elementary level on arts and science. They distract from the sheer amount of hours that are needed to master a much higher level of reading comprehension, vocabulary and mathematical fluency than is currently acquired at those ages.

Because we don't need dumb scientists, or dumb professionals in any category. I've known too many PhD students who couldn't interpret data correctly, which should never happen at that level.

Critical thinking skills must be built very early on, and they come with a rigorous study of reading, writing and math. I fully support arts and science at the middle school and high school level, when children are mature enough to understand them. But elementary school science and arts are mostly a means of entertaining children: I can't count the times I've walked in as a visiting scientist or art room parent volunteer, and most kids cannot grasp the deeper concepts that the teachers are trying to ram down their throats (apart from the ones who have scientist parents).

So the buzz word should be RWM: reading, writing an math.

(And don't get me started on the tripe they call books these days. Schools should expose children to much better quality books, with complex syntax and higher-order vocabulary.)

I completely agree with you. Elementary schools should focus on what used to humorously be called the 3 Rs: "Reading, 'Riting, and 'Rithmetic."
Give kids a strong foundation to build on as they get older.

When I was a kid, the emphasis was on reading skills in the early years. We were always being told that if you can read, you can learn anything.