When did STEM become such a popular buzzword in education?

[Anonymous]

Are you guys using any technology to make these comments? It wasn't an art major that changed communication forever. Do you really just want to use things without any idea about how they work? Like it or not, STEM is about the future. How to feed billions with the space you used to only feed thousands. How to manipulate a desease to cure itself. You're not living longer lives because the poets dreamed. So mouth off all you want about how valuable your liberal arts education was, but my money is on technology and advances in the sciences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STEM people are losers

I know! Why anyone would do that when they can make 2X+ doing easier things is a mystery.

Such as?

For example, any occupation that requires licensing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you guys using any technology to make these comments? It wasn't an art major that changed communication forever. Do you really just want to use things without any idea about how they work? Like it or not, STEM is about the future. How to feed billions with the space you used to only feed thousands. How to manipulate a desease to cure itself. You're not living longer lives because the poets dreamed. So mouth off all you want about how valuable your liberal arts education was, but my money is on technology and advances in the sciences.

It's not like MoCo schools teach microprocessor architecture or the inner workings of the TCP/IP protocol.

[Anonymous]

You seem to be missing the whole point - which is teaching in an integrated fashion, capitalizing on natural connections between disciplines and giving students multiple ways to show what they know. That is, replacing the traditional model of teaching subjects in isolation with an understanding that all knowledge is connected. The arts are core to developing creativity and problem solving skills because it is uniquely positioned to demonstrate that there can be many "right" solutions to a given problem. This is not how schools teach if they are teaching to the test instead of teaching students to think for themselves. Its so easy to be critical. Leaning in to understanding how integrated teaching can better prepare students for any career can open your mind to how hard educators are trying to find approaches that work for all kinds of learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm an engineer, and I hate the buzzword. I also hate the belief that you can "inspire a passion" for "STEM" by having kids build with LEGOs, or some other such nonsense.

What a passionless engineer you must be if you can’t see the beauty of building and inspiring with Legos.
Just this month alone in my son’s STEM LEGO engineering class he
1. LEGO Egg Challenge- built a lego box then proceeded to drop an egg in the box filled with different materials from the top of a ladder to see which egg would survive the fall. The ones he thought would survive didn’t, and the ones he didn’t think would survive did.
2. Built a Lego Beam Bridge- his bridge was able to support 101lbs including his body weight.
3. Built a skyscraper - the base had to be built so it could withstand the weight and height of the legos - most fun was knocking it to the ground.
4. Built a functional treehouse of Lego’s
5. Building an urban LEGO city - must design using function / form , facades, roads, trees, etc etc etc

Child learn through play, and a lego today is a circuit tomorrow and so forth!
Thank goodness there are teachers who believe in Lego’s cause my boy is having the best time learning through play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You seem to be missing the whole point - which is teaching in an integrated fashion, capitalizing on natural connections between disciplines and giving students multiple ways to show what they know. That is, replacing the traditional model of teaching subjects in isolation with an understanding that all knowledge is connected. The arts are core to developing creativity and problem solving skills because it is uniquely positioned to demonstrate that there can be many "right" solutions to a given problem. This is not how schools teach if they are teaching to the test instead of teaching students to think for themselves. Its so easy to be critical. Leaning in to understanding how integrated teaching can better prepare students for any career can open your mind to how hard educators are trying to find approaches that work for all kinds of learners.

But to follow up on that, we need to get rid of the STEM acronym and replace it with the more inclusive and wholistic “STEAM” because the A for arts is just as crucial as the other discreet areas of study.

Its STEAM, people!’

[Anonymous]

LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

This thread is a decade old

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

It’s now STEAM, the A is for Arts, which should have been included in STEM all along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

It’s now STEAM, the A is for Arts, which should have been included in STEM all along.

No one cares about Arts. It's STEM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For some reason it really grates on me. What's wrong with "math and science" or some non-acronym variant?

When people saw the difference between salaries of STEM grads and non-STEM grads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

It’s now STEAM, the A is for Arts, which should have been included in STEM all along.

Nah. People who study A are poor with erratic employment. People who study STEM have good incomes and steady jobs. One of these letters is not like the others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the 1990s, the National Science Foundation coined the term. You can go visit them in Ballston to air your grievances, if you wish.

I laughed. Best thing on dcum today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seem to be missing the whole point - which is teaching in an integrated fashion, capitalizing on natural connections between disciplines and giving students multiple ways to show what they know. That is, replacing the traditional model of teaching subjects in isolation with an understanding that all knowledge is connected. The arts are core to developing creativity and problem solving skills because it is uniquely positioned to demonstrate that there can be many "right" solutions to a given problem. This is not how schools teach if they are teaching to the test instead of teaching students to think for themselves. Its so easy to be critical. Leaning in to understanding how integrated teaching can better prepare students for any career can open your mind to how hard educators are trying to find approaches that work for all kinds of learners.

But to follow up on that, we need to get rid of the STEM acronym and replace it with the more inclusive and wholistic “STEAM” because the A for arts is just as crucial as the other discreet areas of study.

Its STEAM, people!’

Nah. Art simply is not as crucial as say math. That is just wishful thinking. My kids will get STEM supplements and we are definitely excluding art.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “STEM” has been around for decades.

It’s now STEAM, the A is for Arts, which should have been included in STEM all along.

Nah. People who study A are poor with erratic employment. People who study STEM have good incomes and steady jobs. One of these letters is not like the others.

So just ignore that great STEM pioneers like Einstein were accomplished musicians…good luck!