The emphasis on STEM disciplines in schools has caused advocates for art education to propose the addition of the arts to the study of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, transforming STEM into STEAM. However, it is important that the larger purposes of art and education that have traditionally been embraced by the liberal arts are not lost in STEAM education and that the arts are not reduced to a role of cognitive enhancer for other STEM subjects. STEAM education is closely linked to ideas and research about arts integration and is often implemented using the methods of ‘design thinking’. The use of design thinking as a method for interdisciplinary collaboration has many connections to how STEAM education is practise d in schools. Research describing arts integration is also relevant to how art is included in STEAM education. This article describes rationales for STEAM education and how the work of contemporary artists provides generative examples of how STEAM education might be put into practice. Both the affordances and limitations of STEAM education are explored.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllinaB. (2018). The development of STEAM educational policy to promote student creativity and social empowerment. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1296392
Arts Education Partnership. (2018). Preparing educators and students for effective arts Integration.
6.
AtkinsonD. (2017). Some thoughts on the finitude and infinitude of learning and teaching in the context of art in education. In JagodzinskiJ. (Ed.), What is art education? (pp. 127–159). Palgrave.
BeccariaM. (2013). Tate modern artists: Olafur Eliasson. Tate.
9.
BertlingG. (2015). The art of empathy: A mixed methods case study of a critical place-based art education program. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16(3), 1–26. http://www.ijea.org/v16n13/
CorrinL. G.KwonM.BryonN. (1997). Mark Dion. Phaidon.
12.
CostantinoT. (2018). STEAM by another name: Transdisciplinary practice in art and design education. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1292973
13.
CrossN. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers work. Bloomsbury.
14.
DumaA. (2014). A view into a decade of arts integration. Journal for Learning through the Arts10(1).
15.
EisnerE. (2012). Art and knowledge. In KnowlesJ. G.ColeA. L. (Eds.), Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: Perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues (pp. 3–12). Sage.
16.
FarringtonC. A.MaurerJ.Aska McbrideM. R.NagaokaJ.PullerJ. S.ShewfeltS.CatterallJ.DumanS.Hampden-ThomasG. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Four longitudinal studies. National Endowment for the Arts.
17.
FreyN.FisherD.SmithD. (2019). All learning is social and emotional. ASCD.
GrahamM. A. (2011). The art of collecting: Material culture, and place-based education. In BolinP.BlandyD. (Eds.), Matter matters (pp. 73–85). National Art Education Association.
HorvathL.MarshallJ. (2014). The natural sciences. In MarshallJ.DonahueD. (Eds.), Art-centered learning across the curriculum (pp. 35–88). Teachers College Press.
25.
JacobsH. (2010). A new essential curriculum for a new time. In JacobsH. (Ed.), Curriculum 21 (pp. 14–24). ASCD.
26.
JagodzinskiJ. (2010). Visual art and education in an era of designer capitalism. Palgrave.
27.
JohnsonS. (2010). Where good ideas come from. Riverhead.
28.
Katz-BuonincontroJ. (2018). Gathering STE(A)M: Policy, curricular, and programmatic developments in arts-based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Introduction to the special issue of Arts Education Policy Review: STEAM Focus. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1407979
29.
KnochelA. (2018). An object-oriented curriculum theory for STEAM: Boundary shifters, materiality, and per(form)ing 3D thinking. International Journal of Education through Art, 14(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1386/eta.14.1.35_1
LeimbachT.ArmstrongK. (2018). Creative partnerships and cultural organizations: “Enabling” and “situating” arts-science collaboration and collective learning. In GibbsP.NeuhauserP. L.FamD. (Eds.), Transdisciplinary theory, practice, and education (pp. 241–256). Springer.
32.
LudwigM.BoyleA.LindsayJ. (2017). Review of evidence: Arts integration research through the lens of the Every Student Succeeds Act. American Institutes for Research, The Wallace Foundation.
33.
MaddenaM.BaxteraM.BeauchampaH.BouchardaK.HabermasaD.HuffaM.LaddaB.Mulker-GreenfaderC.BrouilletteL.FarkasG. (2015). Effect of a performing arts program on the oral language skills of young English learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(2), 185–203. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rrq.90/abstract
NewmanE.AraqueA.DubinskyJ. (2017). The beautiful brain. In NewmanE.AraqueA.DubinskyJ. (Eds.), The beautiful brain: The drawings of Santiago Ramon y Cajal (pp. 8–11). Abrams.
RadziwillN.BentonM.MoellersC. (2015). From STEM to STEAM: Reframing what it means to learn. The STEAM Journal, 2(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.5642/steam.20150201.3
44.
RapportD. (2000). Transdisciplinarity: An approach to problem solving in a complex world. In SomervilleM.RapportD. (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: Recreating iknowledge (pp. 135–170). EOLSS.
