On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy proposed what
might have seemed like an amazing challenge.
The United States would put a man on the moon before the end of the
decade. This was not an engineering, nor
technology, nor science, nor mathematics challenge; it was a STEM challenge that required STEM
professionals to meet its rigors. At
that time there were very few, if any, STEM professionals and it took the
entire decade to really start to produce them.
Of course, we made it to the moon and it was teams of science, technology,
engineering and mathematics professionals that collectively produced the STEM expertise required.
The Manhattan project demonstrated the effectiveness of a team approach
to solving a STEM problem. The launch of
Sputnik awakened our attention if not shocked us into altering the way science
and engineering is taught. However, one of the many giant leaps from the space
program was the identification of the need for the STEM professional. Granted, the term STEM was still in the
future but by 1970, the fact that we need people that can use the tools of
science and mathematics to engineer a new technology was evident and the impact
of such people on medical science and technology is now very clear. So, what's the problem?
Well, it's not so much a problem as
it is a bit of lost vision. In today's
press and public arena, if STEM is the topic, then student science, math and to
some extent graduation performance quickly becomes the target of that
discussion and the poor scores in various standardized math and science test
the focus of concern. Thus, STEM
education initiatives quickly boil down to improved test performance, some
increase in the K-12 teacher science and mathematics knowledge and increased
pressure on schools to perform. These
objectives are valid and improvements in each is important but equally
important is to keep the distinction between producing people that are skilled
in science, technology, engineering or math and a person that has skills
requiring integration of all four.
If you wish to make an argument that
we need more professionals such as biochemists for cancer drug development or
engineers to rebuild the nation's infrastructure or, for that matter, any
professional in a STEM subject area, it is also important make sure that the
country understands the need for more professionals to create the new
technologies that will, as all new technology does, drive tomorrow's economy. In the 21st century these new
technologies will certainly need people with an inventive spirit as well as
professionals with the individual STEM subject expertise but the focusing
factor will be provided by people that are proficient in all four of the STEM
areas who blur and blend these separate knowledge areas into a unified effort
addressing the STEM challenge at hand.
Thus, the current wave of educational funding should be primarily
directed to the integrated STEM objective.
If we do this, objectives such as better tests scores, more
knowledgeable teachers, etc. will also be satisfied.
One career path that is and will
continue to need STEM professionals as distinguished from a professional in a
STEM subject area, is the technician working within an advanced manufacturing
environment. Directing STEM resources
into the A.S. programs responsible for this technician workforce is
essential. In today's manufacturing
facilities, there remains a need for traditional factory skills but there is a
growing demand for workers that merge those traditional trades with science,
math and engineering skills that support
the complicated technologies that can, for example, fill soft drink
bottles faster than the eye can see. So,
as we push on with strengthening the science and math curricula at various
educational levels, it is important that we include the integrating component
that will produce students that can work as STEM professionals and insert this
component in career pathways that produce tomorrow's scientific and technical
workforce.
No comments :
Post a Comment