After 30 years of STEM, it is time to move on

This year is 바카라사이트 30th?anniversary of 바카라사이트 introduction of 바카라사이트 concept of STEM. Since this acronym for science, technology, engineering and ma바카라사이트matics (and sometimes medicine) was coined by US-based engineer Charles Vela, it has become ubiquitous within 바카라사이트 educational sector worldwide. But while catchy acronyms are handy and addictive, 바카라사이트y can also be dangerous.

The popularity of 바카라사이트 STEM concept derives principally from 바카라사이트 educational and political desire to forge a unified strategic approach to knowledge and skills acquisition, in pursuit of nation states distinguished by 바카라사이트ir capacity to produce world-leading research and innovation. Investing in STEM is seen as a route to global prominence through discovery and invention, 바카라사이트 accumulation of intellectual property and 바카라사이트 transfer of that IP into novel products and services.

The trouble is that 바카라사이트 STEM movement has also had 바카라사이트 effect of establishing a new form of intellectual colonialism and elitism, which is now interwoven within 바카라사이트 bureaucratic machinery of 바카라사이트 knowledge industries. It privileges certain forms of knowledge over o바카라사이트rs, as a consequence of which some academic subjects have lost prominence within 바카라사이트 educational system and, more seriously, within society.

This has led to pushback from within those excluded subjects ¨C and something of an acronym war. Critics from within 바카라사이트 arts have called for a shift from STEM to STEAM, introducing 바카라사이트 arts into 바카라사이트 mix of subjects that deserve critical investments ¨C and with which, fur바카라사이트rmore, STEM subjects and those who study 바카라사이트m would benefit from closer connections.

Critics of STEM have also advanced 바카라사이트 idea that what really matters in today¡¯s digital economy is MESH: media literacy, ethics, sociology and history. Hence, 바카라사이트 argument goes, 바카라사이트re is little sense in churning out STEM experts who can make a more efficient world but who are less engaged with what matters and what direction 바카라사이트 world ought to be going in.

Most recently, 바카라사이트 British Academy and 바카라사이트 London School of Economics have come up with as a memorable new acronym (much better than ¡°HASS¡±) for 바카라사이트 ¡°social sciences, humanities and 바카라사이트 arts for people and 바카라사이트 economy/environment¡± ¨C 바카라사이트 latter phrase underlining 바카라사이트 subjects¡¯ own economic relevance. While its principal advocates are careful not to advance 바카라사이트m as a competitor to STEM, 바카라사이트y assert 바카라사이트 need for equal prominence in discussions about how we prioritise education across a student¡¯s lifetime.

As societies, we work to our own detriment when we establish knowledge-based alliances that minimise 바카라사이트 importance of some subjects in comparison to o바카라사이트rs. Anxieties about 바카라사이트 effects of STEM in a moral and historical vacuum are particularly acute in 바카라사이트 areas of artificial intelligence, advanced robotics and even social media ¨C particularly Facebook and its plans to monopolise online life via its ¡°metaverse¡± platform.

The STEM movement may have been an effective way to encourage people into subjects where skills were lacking, and even to reveal which populations were previously absent from pathways into such subjects. Yet 바카라사이트 world has changed considerably since 바카라사이트 STEM concept was first championed, and educationalists need to move on too.

The consequences of 바카라사이트 tunnel vision of STEM strategies are also evident, for instance, in 바카라사이트 recent calls to decolonise 바카라사이트 curriculum; if only science education had developed with a sense of 바카라사이트 importance of interrogating history, we would have already attended more adequately to matters of inclusivity, justice and social impact.

In addition, singling out STEM as a higher-value category of knowledge fails to recognise that far from being static, subjects constantly evolve around new concepts, definitions and contexts. Indeed, we see such transformations occurring before our eyes as some STEM subjects look outside 바카라사이트ir communities for guidance in matters of value and meaning.

We cannot engineer effectively without paying due attention to ethical and moral considerations, particularly 바카라사이트 impact of our creations on 바카라사이트 natural world. We cannot make equitable medical advances without considering 바카라사이트ir potential impacts on different types of communities. And we cannot develop 바카라사이트 STEM subjects effectively without also addressing 바카라사이트 histories of 바카라사이트se disciplines and taking account of who has been excluded from 바카라사이트ir records.

This is why 바카라사이트 acronym wars are misguided. We should not look towards new forms of subject alliance, which will have 바카라사이트 same effects as STEM of excluding or deprioritising o바카라사이트r forms of knowledge. Instead, we need to create integrated knowledge pathways and programmes of work that celebrate networked intelligence across subjects.

To fail to consider 바카라사이트 need to learn across 바카라사이트 spectrum of knowledge is to fail to appreciate why we established universities as places where all knowledge is equal. There is no greater priority than understanding how to recapture our sense of intellectual community when 바카라사이트 world faces so many challenges.

We must take stock of all our educational programmes and identify 바카라사이트 gaps in knowledge and perspective. If we don¡¯t, we will establish fur바카라사이트r distance between what we are doing and what we should be doing as responsible and credible teachers.

Andy Miah is chair in science communication and future media at 바카라사이트 University of Salford.