articles about stem education

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Worried about violence, threats as election nears? Just say no.

Alone in the spotlight but not alone

The way forward for Democrats — and the country

Employment in STEM occupations has grown 79 percent in the past three decades, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

iStock by Getty Images

Growing gap in STEM supply and demand

Brigid O’Rourke

Harvard Correspondent

Experts cite online learning, digital tools as ways to build inclusive and equitable STEM workforce

The evolution and impact of STEM education and its accompanying career opportunities reflect a positive in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. But as the need grows for a specialized STEM-focused workforce, it’s becoming clear that not everyone has an equal opportunity.

During the Harvard-sponsored talk, “New Pathways to STEM,” panelists cited a large subset of students who are not being fully prepared for STEM careers. They then discussed ways the gap could be closed, pointing to online learning and the rapid advancement of new digital tools as ways to make STEM education more readily available. These new ways of learning, they said, can ultimately expand access to STEM education and create a more inclusive and equitable STEM workforce.

The need for a vast, talented workforce in STEM-related fields has never been more necessary, said Bridget Long, dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Long cited the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows employment in STEM occupations has grown 79 percent in the past three decades. In addition, STEM jobs are projected to grow an additional 11 percent from 2020 to 2030. In Massachusetts alone, “40 percent of all employment revolves around innovation industries, such as clean energy, information technology, defense and advanced manufacturing,” said Long.

But, she added, “the importance of STEM education is about so much more than just jobs. STEM fields demand curious individuals eager to solve the world’s most pressing problems.”

“We need to have a new vision of how we prepare students to think critically about the world … as well as educating a society such that it has scientific literacy,” said Joseph L. Graves Jr., (upper left). Joining Graves were Brigid Long, Mike Edmonson, Amanda Dillingham, and Martin West.

The study of STEM subjects, she continued, teaches critical-thinking skills, and instills a mindset that will help students find success across numerous areas and disciplines. However, Long said, “too often the opportunity to learn and to be inspired by STEM is not available.

“Only 20 percent of high school graduates are prepared for college-level coursework in STEM majors,” she cited, adding, “fewer than half of high schools in the United States even offer computer science classes. So that begs the question — are kids going to be ready to meet the evolving and growing landscape of STEM professions?”

While STEM education opportunities are often scarce for high school students across the board, it’s even more pervasive when you consider how inequitably access is distributed by income, race, ethnicity, or gender. For example, Long said, “Native American, Black and Latinx students are the least likely to attend schools that teach computer science, as are students from rural areas, and [those with] economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

“It’s not surprising that these differences in educational opportunities lead to very large differences in what we see in the labor force. We are shutting students out of opportunity,” she said.

So what can be done to ensure more students from all backgrounds are exposed to a wide variety of opportunities? According to Graduate School of Education Academic Dean Martin West, who is also a member of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, a concerted effort is being made at the state level to work with — and through — teachers to convey to students the breadth of STEM opportunities and to assure them that “it’s not all sitting in front of a computer, or being in a science lab, but showing them that there are STEM opportunities in a wide range of fields.”

The relatively recent emergence of digital platforms, such as LabXchange, are helping to bridge the gap. LabXchange is a free online learning tool for science education that allows students, educators, scientists, and researchers to collaborate in a virtual community. The initiative was developed by  Harvard University’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the  Amgen Foundation . It offers a library of diverse content, includes a  biotechnology learning resource available in 13 languages, and applies science to real-world issues. Teachers and students from across the country and around the world can access the free content and learn from wherever they are.

Many of the panelists also pointed to the need for steady funding in helping to address the inequities.

“Bottom line, if this nation wants to be a competitive leader in STEM, it has to revitalize its vision of what it needs to do, particularly in the public schools where most Black and brown people are, with regard to producing the human and physical infrastructure to teach STEM,” said Joseph L. Graves Jr., professor of biological sciences, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University. Graves is also a member of the Faculty Steering Committee, LabXchange’s Racial Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Science Education Initiative.

The panel noted how LabXchange is partnering  with scholars from several historically Black colleges and universities to develop new digital learning resources on antiracism in education, science, and public health. The content, which will be freely available and translated into Spanish, is being funded by a $1.2 million grant from the Amgen Foundation. Aside from the highly successful LabXchange program, Mike Edmondson, vice president, Global Field Excellence and Commercial, Diversity Inclusion & Belonging at Amgen, noted the Amgen Biotech Experience and the Amgen Scholars program — both of which help to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to engage in science and to see themselves in a STEM career.

We also have to do a better job at helping people understand that that we cannot afford to fall behind in STEM education, Graves argued. “That means it’s going to cost us some money. So, America needs to be willing to pay … to build out STEM education infrastructure, so that we can produce the number of STEM professionals we need going forward,” he said. “We need to have a new vision of how we prepare students to think critically about the world … as well as educating a society such that it has scientific literacy.”

Amanda Dillingham, the program director of science and biology at East Boston High School, is on the front lines of this challenge, and says she believes that supporting teachers is one of the most critical steps that can be taken to address the issue in the immediate future.

When more funding is brought to the table, teachers “are able to coordinate networks … and build biotech labs in our classrooms and build robotics labs in our classrooms …. and are actually able to introduce students to [these fields and these careers] at a very early age,” said Dillingham.

Long and the panel also paid tribute to Rob Lue, the brainchild behind LabXchange, who passed away a year ago.

“Rob challenged science learners, scientists and educators to commit to ending racial inequity,” Long said. “Access was at the core of all of Rob’s many contributions to education at Harvard and beyond. He envisioned a world without barriers and where opportunity was available to anyone, especially in science. In everything that he did, he created an environment in which learners of all ages of diverse backgrounds could come together to imagine, learn, and achieve live exchange. Rob’s free online learning platform for science was his most expansive vision, and one that continues to inspire educators and learners around the world.”

Share this article

You might like.

Key is for leaders, voters to stand in solidarity against it, political scientists say 

Cognitive neurologist sees lessons in age-focused conversations around Biden’s exit, but also a lack of nuance 

Danielle Allen is more worried about identity politics and gaps in civic education than the power of delegates

17 books to soak up this summer

Harvard Library staff recommendations cover romance, fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, memoir, music, politics, history

Beginning of end of HIV epidemic?

Scientists cautiously optimistic about trial results of new preventative treatment, prospects for new phase in battle with deadly virus

• Our Program Divisions
• Our Three Academies
• Government Affairs
• Statement on Diversity and Inclusion
• Our Study Process
• Conflict of Interest Policies and Procedures
• Project Comments and Information
• Read Our Expert Reports and Published Proceedings
• Explore PNAS, the Flagship Scientific Journal of NAS
• Access Transportation Research Board Publications
• Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Economic Recovery
• Fellowships and Grants
• Publications by Division
• Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
• Division on Earth and Life Studies
• Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
• Gulf Research Program
• Health and Medicine Division
• Policy and Global Affairs Division
• Transportation Research Board
• National Academy of Sciences
• National Academy of Engineering
• National Academy of Medicine
• Publications by Topic
• Agriculture
• Behavioral and Social Sciences
• Biography and Autobiography
• Biology and Life Sciences
• Computers and Information Technology
• Conflict and Security Issues
• Earth Sciences
• Energy and Energy Conservation
• Engineering and Technology
• Environment and Environmental Studies
• Food and Nutrition
• Health and Medicine
• Industry and Labor
• Math, Chemistry, and Physics
• Policy for Science and Technology
• Space and Aeronautics
• Surveys and Statistics
• Transportation and Infrastructure
• Searchable Collections
• New Releases

STEM Education Collection

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are cultural achievements that reflect our humanity, power our economy, and constitute fundamental aspects of our lives that contribute to our nation's competitiveness. This collection considers difference school models of STEM education, highlights research on effective STEM education practices, and identifies conditions that promote and limit school success in STEM. These reports are essential for all educators, policy makers, decision makers in school districts, government agencies, curriculum developers, and parent and education advocacy groups.

Equity in K-12 STEM Education: Framing Decisions for the Future  (2024)

Rise and Thrive with Science: Teaching PK-5 Science and Engineering  (2023)

Science and Engineering in Preschool Through Elementary Grades: The Brilliance of Children and the Strengths of Educators  (2022)

Call to Action for Science Education: Building Opportunity for the Future  (2021)

Cultivating Interest and Competencies in Computing: Authentic Experiences and Design Factors  (2021)

Teaching K-12 Science and Engineering During a Crisis  (2020)

Reopening K-12 Schools During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prioritizing Health, Equity, and Communities  (2020)

Increasing Student Success in Developmental Mathematics: Proceedings of a Workshop  (2019)

Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States  (2013)

Science and Engineering for Grades 6-12: Investigation and Design at the Center  (2019)

English Learners in STEM Subjects: Transforming Classrooms, Schools, and Lives  (2018)

Seeing Students Learn Science: Integrating Assessment and Instruction in the Classroom  (2017)

Identifying and Supporting Productive STEM Programs in Out-of-School Settings  (2015)

A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas  (2012)

Ready, Set, SCIENCE!: Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms  (2008)

STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda for Research  (2014)

Barriers and Opportunities for 2-Year and 4-Year STEM Degrees: Systemic Change to Support Students' Diverse Pathways  (2016)

Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8  (2007)

Surrounded by Science: Learning Science in Informal Environments  (2010)

Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits  (2009)

Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century  (2012)

Adapting to a Changing World: Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education  (2013)

Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering  (2008)

Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects  (2009)

The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century  (2004)

Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics  (2011)

Monitoring Progress Toward Successful K-12 STEM Education: A Nation Advancing?  (2013)

Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation: America's Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads  (2011)

The Mathematical Sciences in 2025  (2013)

Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics  (2001)

Mathematics Learning in Early Childhood: Paths Toward Excellence and Equity  (2009)

Types of publications.

Proceedings: Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Consensus Study Reports: Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Rapid Expert Consultation: Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

How Can Emerging Technologies Impact STEM Education?

• Published: 16 November 2023
• Volume 6 , pages 375–384, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Thomas K. F. Chiu 1 &
• Yeping Li 2  

6259 Accesses

3 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

In this editorial, we discuss the affordances and challenges of emerging technologies in designing and implementing STEM education as a planned theme of this special issue. We view that emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual reality, have a double-edged sword effect on STEM learning and teaching. Exploring the effect will help provide a balanced view that simultaneously recognizes the benefits and pitfalls of the technologies and avoids overstating either one. This themed issue highlights how immersive and AI-driven learning environments advance and transform STEM education in different contexts. It consists of this editorial, three research reviews, and two empirical research articles contributed by scholars from five different regions, including Australia, Hong Kong, mainland China, Singapore, and the USA. They discussed the educational, social, and technological effects of emerging technologies. Each article discusses to various extent about the current research status, what and how the technologies can afford, and what concerns the technologies may bring to STEM education.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Emerging technologies can drive changes throughout the educational landscape, leading to redefinition and reshaping of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education. Connecting with and developing skills in technologies is invaluable for being part of the rapidly evolving STEM learning and teaching environments. STEM education should utilize the capabilities and possibilities of technologies to create innovative learning experiences, which enhances students’ learning with new tools and environments such as artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology, robots, virtual reality (VR), intelligent tutoring systems, STEM digital tools, and the next generation of learning management system. Students will need to develop new knowledge and skills to use appropriate emerging technologies to solve contemporary STEM real-world problems. These emerging technologies bring great opportunities for transforming the forms and ways of interactions and collaborations among individuals and with environments. At the same time, those changes can also be viewed as having the potentially disruptive power to interrupt our usual practices and policies and either to ameliorate or exacerbate social and historical inequities. Many questions remain in virtually every aspect of the learning and teaching process with the use of that technologies, such as students’ engagement, learning process, learning interest, outcomes, and instructional design. These questions call for extensive research needed to examine the untapped potential of these technologies in ways that can advance STEM education successfully. This collection of five articles addressed some of these questions from eastern and western perspectives through research reviews and empirical studies with a focus on AI and immersive technologies such as VR.

Overview of the Five Articles

These five articles cover a broad range of issues related to the educational, social, and technological effects of AI and immersive technologies on STEM education.

The first three articles used a systematics review approach to explore the educational, pedagogical, and technological effects of emerging technologies on STEM education. The first article, written by Chng et al. ( 2023 ), demonstrates how AI and immersive technologies advance STEM education by identifying and reviewing 82 journal papers. The authors analyzed the papers from two perspectives—doing things better and doing better things. Their findings discovered that VR and natural language processing were two popular technologies utilized in STEM education, that their use intended to nurture science epistemic skills, and that AI was used to forecast students’ future STEM careers. However, they argued that it is not evident how these technologies may contribute to the advancement of STEM education due to their pedagogical affordances and constraints.

The second article is an analysis of 17 empirical studies by Ouyang et al. ( 2023 ). The purpose of this review was to examine the use of AI in STEM educational assessment from three areas—academic performance assessment, learning status assessment, and instructional quality assessment. The findings showed that deep learning was employed in most of the AI application’s algorithm and that AI was mostly used for evaluating students’ academic performance. They suggested that AI can assist students acquire the capacity to think across disciplines and provide them the tools they need to solve real-world problems by integrating their STEM knowledge and skills. Due to the rising development of AI-based applications for educational assessment, their findings also showed that digital literacy is a requirement for students’ and teachers’ AI usage.

The third article is a descriptive review by Zhang et al. ( 2023 ) on computational thinking in Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM) early childhood education context. They identified and selected nine journal papers for an in-depth investigation. The results indicated that young children had positive learning experiences in a coding-as-playground environment (Bers et al., 2019 ), that they should acquire reasoning, creative, and algorithmic thinking (Angeli & Valanides, 2020 ; Bers et al., 2019 ), and that there were no gender differences in computational thinking utilizing educational robotics (Angeli & Valanides, 2020 ).

The last two articles in this issue addressed the design and implementation and evaluation of STEM learning and teaching with the emerging technologies across various educational levels—PreK-12 and higher education—as well as concerns over the use of the technologies. Specifically, the fourth article is an Australian qualitative study by Izadinia ( 2023 ). The author examined 23 Sydney high school students to determine how VR may be used to create an engaging learning environment that boosts girls’ confidence, engagement, and interest in STEAM. The results revealed that while studying STEAM using VR, girls felt more comfortable and secured utilizing the immersive digital technology. The apparent increase in self-efficacy and confidence motivated girls to pursue jobs in the field of technology by increasing their engagement and interest.

The last article, written by Majewska and Vereen ( 2023 ), investigated how undergraduate students and their instructors in the USA regard the use of VR for biology learning. Examining the impact of VR on the biology learning of undergraduates, they used a questionnaire and a test and instructors’ lecture notes to gain a deeper understanding of the advantages and difficulties that immersive technology brings to science learning. Their findings suggested that students perceived a positive attitude toward STEM and immersive technologies when learning with VR. Instructors developed a positive attitude toward VR because they were able to interact with their students in more authentic ways. They were concerned, however, that the technologies might exacerbate the digital divide between rural and urban areas.

In sum, the key themes that emerged from the aforementioned studies concern the affordances and challenges in the absence of adequately designed and robust pedagogies, along with the need of developing instructors’ and students’ skills and repertoires. These themes demonstrate that emerging technologies are two-edged swords. It is a great chance to advance STEM education, but we are not prepared for it. Students and teachers may find technology easy to use, but they will always expect more from technologies. Technologies are evolving faster than ever before; therefore, it is important to explore and understand the opportunities and challenges they present for transforming STEM education.

Building upon these five articles, we perceive three key opportunities and three key challenges that are relevant in an AI- and metaverse-driven STEM education and beyond. In the next two sections, we discuss how emerging technologies can advance STEM instruction (three key opportunities), followed by presenting three challenges of using the technologies in STEM education. In the last section, we make recommendations for future research direction in the hopes that they will stimulate further discussions among researchers and practitioners about the roles of emerging technologies and their impact on STEM education research and practices.

In What Ways, and to What Extent, May Emerging Technologies Advance STEM Instruction?

Providing a more inclusive, diverse, and equitable education to improve stem workforce development.

STEM educators prioritize inclusivity, diversity, and equity to ensure a comprehensive and impactful education that benefits all students (El-Hamamsy et al., 2023 ). The inequalities in STEM education have negative effects on the inclusivity and diversity of STEM careers, implying that students’ future employment prospects may be harmed by a lack of an appropriate STEM instructional design. Since there is a growing need for STEM professionals, not just the involved students but the workforce and economy as a whole may be negatively impacted by the inequity in STEM education. The inequity may be viewed in two ways—gender and digital (Sevilla et al., 2023 ). Due to gender bias and stereotypes, girls are underrepresented in STEM education and jobs. Gender stereotypes and a lack of female role models are two important factors that discourage young girls from pursuing STEM fields (Freedman et al., 2023 ; Herrmann, et al., 2016 ; Piatek-Jimenez et al., 2018 ). The second point of view is digital inequity or divide. This is due to accessibility and digital skills (Resta & Laferrière, 2015 ). Students who lack digital skills or reside in remote regions are less likely to obtain a more comprehensive STEM education because they lack access to the technologies and resources needed to participate in STEM activities.

The special issue takes a new perspective at how VR and coding may encourage more female and non-STEM students to participate in STEM activities. With the advancement of user-friendly interface, many emerging technologies do not necessitate the perceived need of acquiring specialized skills. They are designed for everyone. Students found VR beneficial and simple to use, establishing a more positive attitude toward technology and STEM learning (Izadinia, 2023 ; Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ). This is explained by Davis’ ( 1989 ) technology acceptance model, which is a major paradigm for understanding the adoption of new technologies in a variety of contexts. According to the model, technology self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, usefulness to use, and attitude toward can predict behavioral intention to, intrinsic motivation to, and actual usage of a technology. This implies that students (boys and girls, computer enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts) are more motivated to use VR and coding in STEM learning (Yu et al., 2021 ). This intrinsic motivation is also strongly associated with STEM interest and identity development that can predict career choice (Chiu, 2023 ; Izadinia, 2023 ; Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ). Emerging technologies empower and engage girls and computer non-enthusiasts in STEM education, increasing their likelihood of developing a stronger interest and identity toward STEM (Izadinia, 2023 ; Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ). Furthermore, Ouyang et al.’s ( 2023 ) study revealed that AI analytics can predict student STEM career involvement and that AI-based virtual mentors may help students grow their STEM careers. To summarize, incorporating emerging technologies into STEM education reduces the likelihood of students falling behind in a way that permanently eliminates them from STEM-related fields. It has the potential to open up the future STEM job opportunities and boost the workforce development by offering a more equitable education.

Encouraging Other Fields to Be Included for Greater Transdisciplinary STEM Learning

Interdisciplinary STEM education is an approach by which students learn the interconnectedness of the disciplines of STEM. Students analyze real-world problems by gathering ideas from STEM disciplines and then integrating these ideas for conducting a more comprehensive analysis. This education needs to be carried out through well-designed curriculum and innovative pedagogy. The interdisciplinary level is affected by teachers’ perceptions and pedagogical content knowledge and students’ discipline knowledge in STEM (Margot & Kettler, 2019 ; Thibaut et al., 2018 ). For example, teachers who have a positive attitude toward STEM and students who have greater abilities are more likely to integrate STEM disciplines in problem-solving. Teacher education is essential to the promotion of interdisciplinary STEM education (Thibaut et al., 2018 ).

Instead of taking a focus on teacher education, in this special issue, we advocate for the use of emerging technologies to create a learning environment conducive to interdisciplinary learning. For example, Izadinia ( 2023 ) claimed that VR can involve students in digital arts for STEM learning; Ouyang et al. ( 2023 ) revealed that students may readily utilize AI to solve problems in integrated ways. These findings could be explained by the theory of experiential learning (Fromm et al., 2021 ) and interdisciplinary nature of AI (Casal-Otero et al., 2023 ). VR can enable experiential learning, allowing students to learn via participant experience or by doing. Students will be able to explore problems and utilize multiple discipline knowledge to complete tasks in an authentic scenario in VR settings. AI is viewed as an interdisciplinary field that includes computer science, mathematics, physics, neurology, psychology, and languages. Understanding how AI works requires interdisciplinary approaches (Chiu et al., 2022 ). AI learning assistants also can help student to gain interdisciplinary STEM knowledge (Carlos et al., 2023 ). These also imply that emerging technologies—VR and AI—have advantages to include other disciplines in STEM education. For example, both Izadinia ( 2023 ) and Zhang et al. ( 2023 ) found that VR and coding can help students explore digital art and expand STEM to STEAM. AI goes beyond STEM and often includes knowledge from other disciplines such as history and geography. Integrating AI in STEM would make STEM more interdisciplinary and readily include other disciplines (Park et al., 2023 ). Therefore, using emerging technologies could create a learning environment that fosters more interdisciplinary STEM education.

Rethinking the Major Learning Outcomes

Emerging technologies, especially AI and the metaverse, have an impact on our society. Some of the jobs will be replaced by technologies, while others have not yet to be created. Skills for the future workforce have evolved. To better equip the next generation, we need to refocus our education efforts and nurture student skills, such as computational thinking, AI literacy, creativity, leaderships, and collaborative skills. These are evidenced in various global educational initiatives like STEM education and AI education for K-12 (Casal-Otero et al., 2023 ; Chiu et al., 2022 ), as well as design thinking and global leadership programs (Kijima et al., 2021 ; Li et al., 2019a ). Our education needs to adapt to the shifting nature of working environment in the future.

The major learning outcomes of interdisciplinary STEM education include STEM knowledge, twenty-first century competencies, interdisciplinary thinking, and STEM interest and identity (Anderson & Li, 2020 ; Li et al., 2019b ). This special issue suggests that, due to the impact of emerging technologies, we should rethink the learning outcomes of STEM education. The “T” and “E” in STEM education are directly influenced by emerging technologies, for instance, students would design and create their own solutions to solve a real-world problem. The “S” and “M” are the foundational knowledge of emerging technologies; for instance, computer vision algorithms are derived from sets of mathematical equations. The findings of the five articles in this issue show that algorithmic and computational thinking, as well as digital, AI, and media literacy, should be core learning outcomes of future STEM education. To strengthen the future workforce, STEM educators and researchers should thus incorporate the learning outcomes in their educational or research projects.

What Challenges and Issues May Emerging Technologies Pose to STEM Instruction, and What New Skills Will Students and Teachers Be Required?

Widening digital divide.

Emerging technologies are double-edged swords and have the potential to both lessen and exacerbate the digital divide. As previously noted, emerging technologies designed for educational purposes are accessible to a wide range of students and user-friendly (Izadinia, 2023 ; Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ; Ouyang et al., 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ), hence reducing the digital gap in STEM education. To build more sophisticated solutions, students need to have a firm grasp of mathematics and hard sciences, in addition to strong technical skills in developing technologies (Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ). As emerging educational technologies become more accessible to young kids, the technologies to be utilized by young kids depend on the school’s resources and the digital competency of the teachers, including their technical knowledge and skills, as well as attitude and value. Most schools and teachers are resistant to change (Chng et al., 2023 ); nevertheless, incorporating new technologies into STEM education represents a significant change for both schools and teachers. Consequently, emerging technologies may worsen the digital divide if schools and teachers do not receive adequate resources and professional training and support, respectively.

Enhancing Prerequisite Skills Needed for Emerging Technology-Enhanced STEM Education

Emerging technologies come with the benefit of fostering new learning skills, but they also call for the development of new prerequisite skills in order to make more successful use of the technologies in STEM education. Despite the fact that the educational technologies are simple to use, a strong foundation of necessary prior knowledge is required for more effective and safe learning and teaching. Articles in this special issue suggest that the required skills include computational thinking, digital literacy, and AI literacy (Chng et al., 2023 ; Ouyang et al., 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ). We believe that it shall be beneficial for students if these skills are taught to them in elementary or middle school. Consideration ought to be given by educational institutions to the development of basic curricula for learning and teaching these skills.

Encountering Technical and Health Concerns

Emerging technologies in STEM education may cause technical and health concerns in implementation. It is time-consuming for teachers to experiment with emerging technologies or design-related materials prior to STEM classes (Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ). Less-well-prepared teachers are more likely to experience technical issues in STEM lessons with emerging technologies. When technological issues arise, it is difficult or impossible to deliver an emerging technology-driven STEM lesson. In addition, some technologies, such as VR, may pose health risks (Izadinia, 2023 ; Majewska & Vereen, 2023 ). Teacher’s knowledge of the technologies will help lessen the incidence of these technical and health concerns. Providing relevant professional training and support is necessary for using emerging technologies in STEM education.

Concluding Thoughts and Future Research Directions

With the inclusion of a limited number of articles, this special issue indicates the initial stage of research in this topic area. There are still many research areas regarding the use of emerging technologies in STEM education that are exciting but remain to be explored. For example, a line of possible research work is the provision of safe learning environments when employing emerging technologies in STEM education. For the purpose of optimizing learning, emerging technologies such as AI and avatars in the metaverse may capture students’ personal information such as learning data, body movement, and face and voice data. How the technologies collected and used the data can associate with privacy and ethical concerns. Another issue is the psychological safety of students. Some students may become addicted to VR and AI and find it difficult to leave the virtual and chatbot environments. Their emotions, such as fear or anger, may be elicited by the environments, influencing their decision-making. Even in the digital environments, maintaining psychological safety is still very much relevant and important to promote STEM learning. Therefore, we suggest that future research should focus on how to create safe learning environments while incorporating emerging technologies in STEM education, taking into consideration of those ethical, privacy, and psychological concerns.

Teacher professional learning is another area that is underserved. Even though four of the five articles addressed teacher involvement in STEM education, none of them examined what and how to provide professional learning for the use of emerging technologies in STEM education. To successfully employ emerging technologies, teachers must have sufficient pedagogical knowledge and skills as well as digital literacy (Chng et al., 2023 ; Ouyang et al., 2023 ). Policy on ethical, privacy, and psychological considerations necessitates the engagement of educational leaders. We encourage future research should focus on how to design, develop, and deliver professional learning for both teachers and leaders.

Concerning theoretical perspectives, Ouyang et al. ( 2023 ) brought up the last line of work. Theoretical support is missing from most studies that use emerging technologies in STEM education. According to those studies, emerging technologies for STEM education were developed and used in new ways. They discussed how teachers and students can use technologies to teach and learn STEM subjects. Most of those studies did not utilize a theoretical framework to examine and interpret their findings. Therefore, future studies should look at their designs and findings from certain theoretical point of view of learning and development.

We hope that the publication of this special issue will inspire researchers to further explore and broaden the field’s knowledge of how emerging technologies transform STEM education, as well as how theories may be developed and used to explain and support the key role of the technologies in STEM learning and teaching. Finally, we encourage researchers and educators to consider possible benefits and difficulties that emerging technologies can offer to STEM education and to envision what a bright future STEM education can be.

Data Availability

The data and materials used and analyzed for the editorial were articles published in this journal. Journal article information is accessible at the journal’s website ( https://www.springer.com/journal/41979 ).

Anderson, J., & Li, Y. (Eds.). (2020). Integrated approaches to STEM education: An international perspective . Springer.

Google Scholar  

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2020). Developing young children’s computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. Computers in Human Behavior, 105 , 105954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018

Article   Google Scholar  

Bers, M. U., González-González, C., & Armas-Torres, M. B. (2019). Coding as a playground: Promoting positive learning experiences in childhood classrooms. Computers & Education, 138 , 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.013

Carlos, C. M., Maggiore, N. M., Dini, V., & Caspari-Gnann, I. (2023). Characterizing facilitation practices of learning assistants: An authoritative-to-dialogic spectrum. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 (1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00429-4

Casal-Otero, L., Catala, A., Fernández-Morante, C., Taboada, M., Cebreiro, B., & Barro, S. (2023). AI literacy in K-12: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 (1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00418-7

Chiu, T. K. F. (2023). Using self-determination theory (SDT) to explain student STEM interest and identity development. Instructional Science, Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09642-8

Chiu, T. K. F., Meng, H., Chai, C. S., King, I., Wong, S., & Yeung, Y. (2022). Creation and evaluation of a pre-tertiary artificial intelligence (AI) curriculum. IEEE Transactions on Education, 65 (1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2021.3085878

Chng, E., Tan, A. L., & Tan, S. C. (2023). Examining the use of emerging technologies in schools A review of artificial intelligence and immersive technologies in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6 , 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00092-y

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 , 319–339.

El-Hamamsy, L., Bruno, B., Audrin, C., Chevalier, M., Avry, S., Zufferey, J. D., & Mondada, F. (2023). How are primary school computer science curricular reforms contributing to equity? Impact on student learning, perception of the discipline, and gender gaps. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 , 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00438-3

Freedman, G., Green, M. C., Kussman, M., Drusano, M., & Moore, M. M. (2023). “Dear future woman of STEM”: Letters of advice from women in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 , 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00411-0

Fromm, J., Radianti, J., Wehking, C., Stieglitz, S., Majchrzak, T. A., & vom Brocke, J. (2021). More than experience? On the unique opportunities of virtual reality to afford a holistic experiential learning cycle. The Internet and Higher Education, 50 , 100804.

Herrmann, S. D., Adelman, R. M., Bodford, J. E., Graudejus, O., Okun, M. A., & Kwan, V. S. (2016). The effects of a female role model on academic performance and persistence of women in STEM courses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38 (5), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2016.1209757

Izadinia, R. (2023). “I could feel a kind of keen air of excitement”: Using IVR to foster girls’ confidence, interest, and engagement in STEAM. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6 , 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00108-7

Kijima, R., Yang-Yoshihara, M., & Maekawa, M. S. (2021). Using design thinking to cultivate the next generation of female STEAM thinkers. International Journal of STEM Education, 8 , 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00271-6

Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Grasser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019a). Design and design thinking in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2 , 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z

Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Grasser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019b). On thinking and STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00014-x

Majewska, A. A., & Vereen, E. (2023). Using immersive virtual reality in an online biology course. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6 , 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00095-9

Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2

Ouyang, F., Dinh, T. A., & Xu, W. (2023). A systematic review of AI-driven educational assessment in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6 , 3.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00112-x

Park, J., Teo, T. W., Teo, A., Chang, J., Huang, J. S., & Koo, S. (2023). Integrating artificial intelligence into science lessons: Teachers’ experiences and views. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 , 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00454-3

Piatek-Jimenez, K., Cribbs, J., & Gill, N. (2018). College students’ perceptions of gender stereotypes: Making connections to the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields. International Journal of Science Education, 40 (12), 1432–1454. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1482027

Resta, P., & Laferrière, T. (2015). Digital equity and intercultural education. Education and Information Technologies, 20 , 743–756.

Sevilla, M. P., Luengo-Aravena, D., & Farías, M. (2023). Gender gap in STEM pathways: The role of secondary curricula in a highly differentiated school system—the case of Chile. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 (1), 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00450-7

Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71 , 190–205.

Yu, K. C., Wu, P. H., Lin, K. Y., Fan, S. C., Tzeng, S. Y., & Ku, C. J. (2021). Behavioral intentions of technology teachers to implement an engineering-focused curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 8 (1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00305-z

Zhang, Y., Ng, O. L., & Leung, S. (2023). Researching computational thinking in early childhood STE(A)M education context: A descriptive review on the state of research and future directions. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6 , 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00097-7

Download references

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

Thomas K. F. Chiu

Texas A&M University, College Station, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yeping Li .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Chiu, T.K.F., Li, Y. How Can Emerging Technologies Impact STEM Education?. Journal for STEM Educ Res 6 , 375–384 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00113-w

Download citation

Published : 16 November 2023

Issue Date : December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00113-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Artificial intelligence (AI)
• Computational thinking
• Emerging technologies
• STEM education
• Virtual reality (VR)
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

The Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research is a quarterly, peer-reviewed publication for educators in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. The journal emphasizes real-world case studies that focus on issues that are relevant and important to STEM practitioners. These studies may showcase field research as well as secondary-sourced cases. The journal encourages case studies that cut across the different STEM areas and that cover non-technical issues such as finance, cost, management, risk, safety, etc. Case studies are typically framed around problems and issues facing a decision maker in an organization.

The Journal of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) Education: Innovations and Research publishes peer-reviewed:

• real-world case studies and other innovations in education
• research articles from educational research that inform the readers on teaching and learning endeavors in STEM
• articles that discuss recent developments that have an impact on STEM education in areas such as policy and industry needs

The case studies may include color photographs, charts, and other visual aids in order to bring engineering topics alive. The research articles will focus on innovations that have been implemented in educational institutions. These case studies and articles are expected to be used by faculty members in universities, four-year colleges, two-year colleges, and high schools. In addition, the journal provides information that would help the STEM instructors in their educational mission by publishing:

• a comprehensive list of articles that appeared in other journals
• grant announcements related to STEM education
• advertisements from companies

Mission Statement

To promote high-quality undergraduate education in science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics through peer reviewed articles that provide:

• Case studies and other innovations in education
• Well founded in STEM content
• Informed by educational research
• Tested through assessment of impact on student learning
• Results from educational research that informs teaching and learning in STEM
• Recent developments that impact STEM education in such areas as policy and industry needs
• Develop student thinking and problem solving
• Integrate real world issues with theories in STEM
• Respond to employer needs and expectations
• Use educational research and student assessment to inform innovations in education

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

What do the data say about the current state of K-12 STEM education in the US?

A conversation with Julia Phillips of the National Science Board on the state of elementary and secondary STEM education in the nation.

The importance of a diverse STEM-educated workforce to the nation's prosperity, security and competitiveness grows every year. Preparing this future workforce must begin in the earliest grades, but the latest report from the National Science Board finds that the performance of U.S. students in STEM education continues to lag that of students from other countries.

Julia Phillips is a physicist and materials science researcher who chairs NSB's Committee on National Science and Engineering Policy, which oversees the congressionally mandated  Science and Engineering Indicators  report, also known as Indicators, in collaboration with NSF's National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics .

The latest Elementary and Secondary STEM Education report , the first of the 2022 Indicators reports, raises more concern about the state of STEM education in the nation and its potential impact on the economy and the U.S. standing in the world.   Phillips discusses the key trends and their implications for science and education policy in the U.S.

Note: some of the conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

What does the report tell us about K-12 STEM education?

What we see is that the performance of children in the U.S. has not kept pace with the performance of students from other countries in science and mathematics for a decade or more. We have pretty much stayed steady, and other countries have improved dramatically. When you look at the closest economic competitors to the U.S., our scores are in last place in mathematics and in the middle of the pack in science. Math scores have not improved for more than a decade, and they're not good when you compare them to other countries.

This is just not something that we can be comfortable about. Our economy depends on math and science literacy. This is not only a concern for those with careers in those topics but also for the public at large.

You've said before that performance is "lumpy," with some groups of students performing very well and improving over time and others remaining stagnant or falling back. Where are the trouble spots?

I think it ought to be extremely disturbing to everyone in the U.S. that science and math performance is not equally distributed across the country. You see huge differences in performance based on race and ethnicity, so that Asian and white students do much better on these standardized tests than students of color. And you also see that there is a huge difference based on the socioeconomic background of students – students that are from higher socioeconomic backgrounds do much better than students from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Data also show that the situation has only been exacerbated by the pandemic. We have a multi-year gap to pull out of just from COVID, and we were already in a weak position to begin with.

Why are the educational results so unevenly distributed?

We don't know exactly. But we can notice that certain things tend to occur at the same time.

For example, students of lower socioeconomic status or those from certain demographic groups tend to be in schools where teachers have less experience in teaching. There's separate evidence that teachers tend to get better as they get more experience.

Students from low socioeconomic status and minority backgrounds also tend to have teachers who are not originally educated in the fields that they teach, and that's particularly true in science.

Why should people care about these numbers?

Every parent should care, because careers in science and engineering are some of the best careers that a young person can pursue in terms of opportunities for making a really good living, from a certificate or associate degree all the way up through a Ph.D. You don't have to have the highest degree to make a really good living in a science and engineering field.

The second thing is that science and engineering is increasingly important for driving the U.S. economy. Many of the industries that we depend upon – including the auto industry, construction, all the way up through vaccine development – depend to an increasing level on literacy in math and science. If the U.S. is going to continue to have the wealth and prosperity that it has come to enjoy, being in the lead in many of these industries is going to be very important.

Julia Phillips on U.S. leadership in science

What can be done to turn these statistics around and improve STEM scores?

There has to be an all-hands-on-deck approach to emphasizing the importance of high-quality math and science education, beginning in the elementary grades and continuing all the way through as much education as a student gets. Communication is needed to say why it is important to have good math and science education.

NSF has prioritized programs that address this issue as well, like  INCLUDES , which uses a collective approach to help broaden participation in STEM.  Perhaps we could also be encouraging individuals with math and science backgrounds to go into teaching if they are drawn to that. We also need to increase the level of respect for the teaching profession.

How do you think education changed in recent decades, or even from when you were a student yourself and became interested in science?

In my own personal experience growing up in a small town in the middle of a bunch of cornfields in Illinois, I don't think I knew any practicing research scientists. But having teachers who were able to make science come alive with the things around us – whether it was nature, the stars, the gadgets in our house, whatever – they were able to make it interesting, relevant and exciting, and we were able to get a little taste for what we might be able to do. Teacher education programs must incorporate more STEM education so that elementary school teachers have the skills and comfort level they need to nurture young children's natural curiosity. NSF has funded some great research on STEM education that could be applied in the classroom, including work on teaching critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity and digital literacy.

With the internet, it is now possible for students to talk to practicing scientists and engineers, even if they don't live close to where the student is. Perhaps one good thing that the pandemic has taught us is that – if done correctly – virtual connectivity can augment educational opportunities in a very dramatic way. 

I also think there needs to be communication between the various groups that are responsible for K-12 education. For the most part that happens at the local school district, and standards are often set by the state. There needs to be communication between the federal level – which is where much science and math policy is established – and the very local level where the education policy is set and the requirements for education are carried out. It is a big problem, and a big challenge. But also, a big opportunity.

When Sputnik was launched, the attention of the entire nation was riveted. We need to get a spirit of curiosity and drive to do something to change the world into every school district, both at the administration and teacher level but also on the part of the kids and their parents.

About the Author

Related stories.

Dive into research on world's ocean

Mobile video game submerges users into ocean depths

Concepts in quantum materials and computing: From dreams toward use

• Request a Demo

Educators Blog

Top 10 STEM Education News Articles

By Maggie O'Brien,

We've reviewed articles on STEM education and project-based learning (PBL) throughout the year and took note of the stories we found exceptionally inspiring and educational. Below are our favorite articles and some of the most highly read. Topics range from research reports to feature stories about new STEM and PBL initiatives in schools.

These articles support Defined STEM’s mission of assisting students in developing the critical 21st-century skills they need to succeed in college, career, and life.

Top STEM Education and PBL News Stories:

I Was A Bad Student Who Became an Astronaut. Let’s Stop Telling People They Can’t Be Good at Science This was the most highly read article on STEM education in 2018 —shared across social media over 31.8K times.     TIME Since I’ve returned from spending a year in space, I’ve been traveling the world sharing my experiences. I’ve been surprised by one of the things I’ve heard from audiences: that they believe science is too difficult, too complex for a normal person to comprehend. Apparently, over one-third of the world thinks I’m a genius because according to the 3M State of Science Index, 36% of people around the globe think you need to be a genius in order to have a career in science. I’m here to tell you that’s not true.  Read more…

Can Schools Change Measures of Success by Focusing on Meaningful Work Instead of Test Scores? Kqed | Mindshift PHILADELPHIA — In a city that’s struggled to meet the educational needs of many of its children, especially its most vulnerable ones, a select group of district high schools is shunning the traditional classroom model in which teachers dispense knowledge from the front of the room and measure progress with tests. Instead, the schools have adopted an approach that’s become increasingly popular among education advocates and funders: project-based learning. Read more…

Boosting Student Engagement Through Project-Based Learning Edutopia Taji Allen-Sanchez, a sixth- and seventh-grade science teacher at San Francisco’s Aptos Middle School, is one of a growing number of teachers who believe that traditional methods of teaching aren’t preparing students for life beyond school. Lectures and direct instruction can be used to convey information to students, but they don’t enhance skills like teamwork, problem solving, and curiosity that employers are increasingly looking for. Read more…

How we developed a personalized PBL model for STEM eSchool News How can schools and districts prepare students for college and careers in STEM? Is it by asking them to passively read a textbook or listen to a teacher lecture? Or is it by challenging them to actively engage in projects that attempt to solve real-world problems? In Harmony Public Schools in Texas, we want students to become active learners, problem solvers, and STEM advocates. We want to increase their knowledge, skills, and interest in STEM, and balance student-centered teaching with state and national standards. To do this, we developed a personalized project-based learning (PBL) model called STEM Students on the Stage (SOS)™.  Read more…

Commentary: Where STEM Context and Careers Meet U.S. News & World Report STEM JOBS REPRESENT ONE of the fastest-growing opportunities in our economy, leaping past other careers. These jobs in the science, technology, engineering and math fields often pay better than other jobs for workers with the same level of education, and there is a shortage of young people pursuing these paths, in the public and private sectors. Despite all of these reasons to pursue a STEM degree, a recent Pew Research Center survey found, “only a third of workers (33%) ages 25 and older with at least a bachelor’s degree have an undergraduate degree in a STEM field.” With a network of 20,000-plus schools throughout North America, EVERFI delivers digital resources that help teachers equip students with the skills they need to succeed.  Read more…

3 Strategies to keep students engaged in STEM eSchool News STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) is more than just an acronym or a collection of letters. Rather, it is an instructional movement that embodies cross-curricular concepts from four fundamental disciplines, as well as a research-based strategy that addresses the future needs of a technology-driven work force and sustaining a global economy.  Read more…

Ensuring that PBL is Accessible to All Edutopia Project-based learning (PBL) continues to gain momentum as a powerful approach to teaching and learning, and for good reason. Research indicates that when implemented well, PBL improves student motivation and achievement, and helps students master skills that are essential for college and career readiness.  Read more…

Four Inquiry Qualities At The Heart of Student-Centered Teaching Mindshift Whether it be project-based learning, design thinking or genius hour, it's easy to get confused by the many education buzzwords floating about. But at their heart these pedagogies are all student-centered and there are commonalities across them that are the key to their success and far more critical than keeping the jargon straight. Read more…

Early STEM Exposure Through Career-Focused PBL eSchool News Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education is most effective when students understand how these concepts apply in the real world. Learning how actual scientists, engineers, and other professionals use STEM concepts to solve complex problems helps bring these ideas to life and answers the age-old question, “Why do we have to learn this?” Read more…

Career-Focused PBL Edutopia In Kankakee, Illinois, students begin exploring future careers as soon as they start kindergarten. By engaging in project-based learning units that have a strong career focus, students experience education through the eyes of landscape architects, lawyers, culinary artists, entrepreneurs, and more. “We want them to start thinking early about opportunities,” says Kankakee superintendent Genevra Walters, “and understand the connection between what they’re doing in school and their long-term goals.” Since becoming superintendent in 2014, Walters has been redesigning the K–12 system so that all children have access to education that prepares them for the future. Read more…

Subscribe to the #1 PBL Blog!

Receive new articles in the world of Project Based Learning, STEM/STEAM, and College & Career Readiness. 

• Project-Based Learning (369)
• STEM/STEAM (170)
• College and Career Readiness (55)
• Professional Learning (52)
• Career-Connected Learning (37)
• Social and Emotional Learning (36)
• Computer Science (16)
• Assessment (6)
• Highlights (1)

Subscribe to our blog

Revitalizing STEM education to equip next generations with STEM competency

Launched in March 2024 as part of the cooperation between UNESCO and Huawei Technologies, the project “Revitalizing STEM education to equip next generations with STEM competency”  seeks to promote STEM education in Europe by co-creating innovative educational solutions and increase institutional and professional capabilities. It will also contribute to rethinking and revitalising the STEM learning model for the next generations and provide a platform for sharing knowledge and best practices at the regional and global levels. 

• Donor: Huawei Technologies
• Budget: 450,000 USD
• Project duration: 15 months
• Location: Europe

Following a call for applications published in March 2024, 5 project teams in Europe were selected:

• Gender and STEM Education in Romania ( Belgium, Romania ) 
• TechBridge: Empowering Refugees and Migrants in Europe through Digital Education and Job Market Integration ( Germany ) 
• Advancing Innovative STEM Education and Research in Earthquake Engineering toward Sustainable Environment: QUAKESAFE ( North Macedonia ) 
• Teaching primary mathematics through problem-solving using lesson study ( Malta ) 
• Integrating and Supporting STEM in the Educational Curriculum through UNESCO Microscience Experiments Project ( Romania ) 

What the project is providing

• Important support to UNESCO Member States in rethinking and revitalising the STEM learning model for next generations, with the development of innovative, cross-cutting solutions and the aim of closing the digital and gender gap in STEM education. 
• To achieve the 2030 Agenda, in particular, SDG 4 and SDG 9, it is essential to invest in and coordinate action to implement innovative educational solutions and increase institutional and professional capabilities. 

To achieve the strategic goal and address the needs on the ground, the project includes two interconnected outcomes:

• Outcome 1: Educators and learners in the region will benefit from the improvement of the teaching and learning practices based on the promotion of STEM education research and innovation at the regional level. 
• Outcome 2: Learners and stakeholders in STEM education in the region will benefit from the STEM clearinghouse to support knowledge sharing and form a Regional STEM Alliance to sustain collaboration and synergies.
• Outcome 1 : Innovative STEM Research Activities  and STEM Educational Activities will be developed and implemented in a 6-month timeframe by 5 selected project teams. The selected projects will receive funding (up to 26,000 USD) to implement the two pillars of activities. Project teams will have the opportunity to consolidate the results and co-develop a knowledge hub for STEM education in the region, through the participation in a co-creative workshop and other collaborative activities. 
• Outcome 2 : A Regional STEM clearinghouse will be created to serve as a platform for gathering, evaluating and disseminating educational resources and knowledge to a broader audience. Project teams and other relevant stakeholders will become members of the UNESCO STEM Alliance, launched in November 2023. The Alliance will mobilise relevant actors in the areas of STEM education and reinforce regional collaboration to implement the STEM Alliance Roadmap towards 2030. 

News & events

12/03/2024  UNESCO and Huawei Technologies embark on a transformative journey to reinvigorate STEM education

26/03/2024  Call for Proposals: Revitalizing STEM education to equip next generations with STEM Competency (Extended deadline: 12 May 2024)

• Huawei Technologies

UNESCO Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe

• Megumi Watanabe, Programme Specialist Education,  [email protected]
• Jing Fang, Associate Project Officer  Science unit ,  [email protected]  

Related items

• Natural sciences
• Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
• Sustainable development
• 2030 Agenda
• Region: Europe and North America
• SDG: SDG 4 - Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
• SDG: SDG 9 - Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
• See more add

This article is related to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals .

More on this subject

Other recent projects

share this!

July 30, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Boost creativity in schools and build STEM careers, say educators

by University of South Australia

It opens the mind and is at the heart of innovation, yet while creativity is recognized as a critical skill for Australia's economic future, it is typically confined to the arts, skipping other areas of the curriculum.

Now, research , published in Creativity Research Journal from the University of South Australia, shows that creativity plays a key role in engaging students in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), not only motivating them to continue their studies in STEM, but positively influencing STEM career choices beyond school.

It's an important finding for educational design, particularly given STEM skill shortages driven by an under-representation of women in STEM, and the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) and automation.

Australia continues to face a STEM crisis, with school students' results in math and science stagnating or declining compared to international counterparts, and less than 10% of students studying higher level math. Nationally, women make up only 37% of enrollments in university STEM courses, and only 15% of STEM-qualified jobs are held by women.

Working with an unusually sizable longitudinal dataset, researchers were able to track how students' attitudes changed towards different subjects throughout high school , finding that their sense of being able to be creative was a significant factor influencing subject choice.

UniSA Ph.D. student Maria Vieira, says integrating creativity across STEM subjects at school is a proactive move to encourage greater engagement, retention, and career pathways in STEM. Although this approach benefits both female and male students , it can serve as an effective tool to address the persistent gender gap in these fields.

"As the world becomes more reliant on AI and automation, the importance of STEM is undeniable. Yet there remains a distinct gap between the education system and the skills being demanded by employers," Vieira says.

"Educating future generations in STEM is vital to help solve the problems of the future, but we need more students, and more diverse students, to study STEM throughout their school and university careers to meet future work demands.

"We also need to nurture '21st century skills, uniquely human skills like creativity, that cannot be replaced by AI.

"This research combines both. By incorporating creativity into STEM subjects, we're ensuring students can feel creative, which motivates and encourages them to continue with STEM and hopefully take up STEM career pathways."

However, with NSW ushering in a new school curriculum that focuses on direct instruction—learning essential knowledge with detailed and specific content—there is a risk that student motivation will drop, says co-researcher, Professor Simon Leonard.

"As AI takes over the mundane, we need education to become good at working with complex capabilities like creativity," Prof Leonard says.

"Of course, direct instruction is necessary to build important skills, like numeracy and literacy, but it is not sufficient to prepare children to thrive in the world of tomorrow, and to make it a world worth thriving in.

"Humans like to be and to feel creative. It motivates us to succeed. We need policy makers , school leaders and researchers to really open up to the idea that creativity is at the heart of motivating students, and it can make the difference in graduates choosing to study in a STEM field."

Provided by University of South Australia

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Physicists report new insights into exotic particles key to magnetism

14 minutes ago

A Band-Aid for the heart? New 3D printing method makes this, and much more, possible

42 minutes ago

Study shows link between asymmetric polar ice sheet evolution and global climate

2 hours ago

Microscopy breakthrough promises better imaging for sensitive materials

Plant biologists discover an ancient gene family is responsible for plant prickles across species

Researchers uncover 500 million-year-old mollusk ancestor

Retreating Andean rocks signal the world's glaciers are melting far faster than predicted, report scientists

When it comes to DNA replication, humans and baker's yeast are more alike than different, scientists discover

Astronomers use AI to find elusive stars 'gobbling up' planets

3 hours ago

Chemical and transportation industries could get a boost with new catalyst coating

4 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Sources to study basic logic for precocious 10-year old.

Jul 21, 2024

Free Abstract Algebra curriculum in Urdu and Hindi.

Jul 20, 2024

Kumon Math and Similar Programs

Jul 19, 2024

AAPT 2024 Summer Meeting Boston, MA (July 2024) - are you going?

Jul 4, 2024

How is Physics taught without Calculus?

Jun 25, 2024

Is "College Algebra" really just high school "Algebra II"?

Jun 16, 2024

More from STEM Educators and Teaching

Related Stories

Which is more creative, the arts or the sciences?

Oct 13, 2020

Research confirms creativity is key for both arts and science

Jul 22, 2020

STEM Career Days boost high school students' career aspirations in STEM fields, study finds

Nov 6, 2023

Parents can influence children's choice and success in STEM major

Dec 7, 2021

Research unveils effective STEM program models for high school students from historically marginalized communities

Mar 8, 2024

Guidance counselors could help female high schoolers erase the STEM gender gap: Report

Apr 3, 2024

Recommended for you

Autonomy boosts college student attendance and performance

Jul 31, 2024

Study reveals young scientists face career hurdles in interdisciplinary research

Jul 29, 2024

Transforming higher education for minority students: Minor adjustments, major impacts

Communicating numbers boosts trust in climate change science, research suggests

Jul 26, 2024

Smartphone reminders found to have negative impact on learning times

Jul 17, 2024

High ceilings linked to poorer exam results for uni students

Jul 3, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

More From Forbes

How education technology can prepare younger adults for stem careers.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Excited girls using chemistry set together in elementary science classroom

The landscape of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) careers is evolving rapidly, demanding a new approach to education that prepares younger adults for future challenges and opportunities. At the heart of this transformation lies education technology (EdTech), which has become a vital tool in equipping students with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed.

One of the critical ways EdTech impacts STEM education is by bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application. Traditional education methods often struggle to keep pace with the rapid advancements in STEM fields. However, EdTech tools, such as interactive simulations, virtual labs, and online coding platforms, enable students to engage with complex concepts in a hands-on manner. These technologies make abstract ideas tangible, allowing students to experiment and learn through doing, which is crucial for grasping STEM subjects.

Moreover, EdTech promotes critical thinking, problem-solving, and adaptability—skills that are indispensable in STEM careers. Through gamified learning experiences and project-based assignments, students are encouraged to approach problems creatively and collaboratively. This shift from rote memorization to active learning helps students develop a deeper understanding of STEM concepts and prepares them for real-world challenges. EdTech platforms also provide personalized learning experiences, catering to individual learning styles and paces, ensuring that no student is left behind.

In addition to enhancing academic achievement, EdTech plays a significant role in making STEM education more accessible and inclusive. Online courses and digital resources can reach students in remote or underserved areas, providing them with opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable. This democratization of education helps to level the playing field, allowing a more diverse group of students to pursue STEM careers. Additionally, EdTech can support students with different learning needs by offering adaptive learning technologies that tailor content to individual requirements.

I recently came across Jeffrey Harvey PE ’s work. Harvey is a seasoned professional engineer and author, who brings invaluable insights into the intersection of EdTech and STEM education, particularly through his recent work in the K-12 space. His research highlights the pivotal role EdTech plays in shaping the next generation of STEM professionals.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

Jeffrey Harvey PE

Harvey's work in EdTech underscores the importance of early and continuous exposure to STEM concepts. By integrating innovative learning tools into K-12 education, students are not only prepared for higher education but are also inspired to pursue careers in STEM fields. His approach emphasizes the need for educators and policymakers to invest in EdTech solutions that foster a lifelong love of learning and curiosity in STEM subjects.

Harvey, with over 30 years of experience in the STEM fields, has dedicated his career to guiding young professionals. Having held leadership roles in Fortune 500 companies, he possesses a deep understanding of the technical and soft skills required in the industry. His latest book , STEM Secrets for Interviewing: 4 Secret Mindsets Essentials to Conquer Interviews Including the Top 71 Interview Questions , offers practical strategies for mastering STEM job interviews.

One of the challenges in integrating EdTech into STEM education is ensuring that teachers are adequately trained to use these tools effectively. Professional development programs and ongoing support are essential for educators to maximize the potential of EdTech in their classrooms. Schools and districts must prioritize teacher training and provide the necessary resources to help educators stay abreast of the latest technological advancements.

Furthermore, the implementation of EdTech must be accompanied by a thoughtful curriculum that aligns with industry needs. Collaboration between educational institutions and industry leaders can ensure that the skills being taught are relevant and up-to-date. Harvey's career, which spans both educational and industrial spheres, illustrates the importance of such partnerships in creating a robust STEM education ecosystem.

Looking ahead, the role of EdTech in preparing younger adults for STEM careers will only become more critical. As technological advancements continue to accelerate, the demand for skilled STEM professionals will grow. By embracing EdTech, we can equip students with the tools they need to thrive in this dynamic field. Jeffrey Harvey's insights and experiences serve as a testament to the transformative power of EdTech in shaping the future of STEM education.

Dr. Katie Bouman , Assistant Professor of Computing and Mathematical Sciences at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), played a key role in developing the algorithm that created the first-ever image of a black hole, showcasing the power of interdisciplinary STEM research. While Dr. Katie Bouman is primarily known for her groundbreaking work in imaging black holes, she has indeed emphasized the importance of education and inspiring the next generation of scientists.

The integration of EdTech into STEM education is essential for preparing the next generation of professionals. By providing interactive, personalized, and accessible learning experiences, EdTech empowers students to develop the critical skills needed for success in STEM careers. Jeffrey Harvey's work highlights the importance of early exposure, effective teacher training, and industry collaboration in maximizing the impact of EdTech. As we look to the future, investing in EdTech will be crucial in ensuring that students are equipped to meet the challenges and opportunities of the evolving STEM landscape.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

The Hechinger Report

Covering Innovation & Inequality in Education

Alternative STEM education: A noncollege path to jobs for students from underrepresented groups

Share this:.

• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

The Hechinger Report is a national nonprofit newsroom that reports on one topic: education. Sign up for our  weekly newsletters  to get stories like this delivered directly to your inbox. Consider supporting our stories and becoming  a member  today.

Get important education news and analysis delivered straight to your inbox

• Weekly Update
• Future of Learning
• Higher Education
• Early Childhood
• Proof Points

BROOKLYN, N.Y. — About one and a half years ago, Isaiah Hickerson woke up in the middle of the night having dreamt he was a coder.

The dream was totally random, as dreams so often are. He didn’t know a thing about coding.

He was 23, and though originally from California, he’d been living with his uncle in Miami. By day, he was answering phones in the grooming department at PetSmart. After hours, he was trying to figure out what to do with his life.

He’d tried social media. And he’d taken some community college classes in business and biology. He was lukewarm on both.

“I just felt empty,” Hickerson said. “I wanted to do something different, but I just didn’t know what it was. I didn’t have a passion for anything. And I didn’t know what passion felt like.”

He knows how far-fetched it sounds, but seeing himself coding in the dream changed him. Moments after he woke up, he was online trying to figure out what it all meant.

“I remember the whole entire thing and it’s crazy. I can’t make it up,” Hickerson said. “I literally got up right from there, 2 in the morning, probably 2:05. I remember the whole entire timeline because this is what shifted — my dream is what brought me here.”

By “here,” Hickerson means the Marcy Lab School in Brooklyn, New York, where he’s nearly finished with a one-year software engineering fellowship program. It’s not a college or a for-profit tech boot camp, but a nonprofit, tuition-free program designed to help students from historically underrepresented communities — like Hickerson, who is Black — get high-paying jobs in tech.

Related: Interested in innovations in the field of higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly Higher Education newsletter .

Across the country, colleges and universities offer scores of programs designed to help students from underrepresented groups succeed in STEM education and prepare for tech careers. Far less common are independent nonprofits that focus on students who don’t have the resources to go to college, don’t want to go to college or don’t believe they can succeed in a demanding STEM program. These nonprofits offer short-term training programs, for free, and help with job placement.

Two prominent examples, on opposite coasts, are the Marcy Lab School and Hack the Hood, in Oakland, California. Hack the Hood conducts 12-week data science-training programs and has recently partnered with Laney College, a community college in Oakland, to offer students a certificate of achievement in data science.

Data from the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics shows that Black and Latino people earn science and engineering bachelor’s degrees at a disproportionately low rate , are underrepresented in the college-educated STEM workforce and earn lower salaries in those jobs than their white and Asian peers.

Achieving better representation means finding ways to get students the academic and financial assistance they need. The financial resources needed for a four-year STEM degree — or even a two-year degree — can be prohibitive. Opening up shorter avenues that are free — or significantly less expensive than for-profit boot camps — can at least put students on the path toward a STEM career. Programs designed with these students in mind give them training so that they have a shot to compete for STEM jobs with salaries that can lead to economic and social mobility. (Both the Marcy Lab School and Hack the Hood are nonprofits funded by donations from philanthropic groups.)

Related: When universities slap their names on for-profit coding bootcamps

“STEM is a white, cis, heteronormative field,” Weverton Ataide Pinheiro, an assistant professor in the College of Education at Texas Tech University, said. “And these people are the only ones that are being able to get a slice of the pie. Actually, they’re eating the whole pie.”

For Ataide Pinheiro, these free alternative programs have value, regardless of whether they result in a college degree, if they allow people from historically marginalized groups to get just one step further than they would have gotten without the training.

“We are desperate to just try to support these folks because we know money matters,” Ataide Pinheiro said. “We know that they will only be able to compete if they have certain training, and they might not be able to pay [for it].”

Reuben Ogbonna, one of the Marcy Lab School’s co-founders, said his team has worked hard to establish partnerships with tech companies to get software engineering job opportunities for Marcy students when they finish the program. Ogbonna said a team of former educators and salespeople introduces Marcy to companies, hoping to convince them to consider Marcy students for roles that would typically require a bachelor’s degree.

To prevent Marcy students from being “met with a glass ceiling somewhere down the line” because of their nontraditional training, Ogbonna said that Marcy asks the companies to treat its students the way they’d treat anyone else in the job interview process so that they can prove their skills and show employers that they deserve equal treatment as they progress in their careers.

Since the Marcy Lab School opened in 2019, roughly 200 students have completed the program. In the first three years, about 80 percent of them graduated, and about 90 percent of those who graduated landed jobs in STEM with an average salary of $105,000 per year, according to Ogbonna. But in the past two years, during what Ogbonna called a tech recession, it’s been significantly more difficult for these students to get jobs. He said that this year, six months after graduating, about 60 percent of graduates had jobs.

Related: To attract more students to STEM fields in college, advocates urge starting in sixth grade

By pursuing an education at Marcy rather than attending a four-year college, students get three extra years to make money, build their savings and accrue wealth, Ogbonna said. And they won’t have student loans to pay off.

“We’re trying to reverse a really big problem that’s been around for a long time,” Ogbonna said. “And part of my theory of change is that if we can get wealth in the hands of our students earlier, it can come out exponentially for the communities that we’re serving.”

Both the Marcy Lab School and Hack the Hood also try to prepare students for what they might experience when they get into the workforce.

Hack the Hood serves students between the ages of 16 and 25 and, in addition to the technical curriculum, teaches students about racial equity, social justice issues and understanding their personal identities, said Samia Zuber, its executive director.

Zuber explained that these parts of the program help prepare students to confront issues such as imposter syndrome and to think critically about the work they are doing. For example, Zuber said, they teach students about racial bias in facial recognition software and the implications it can have for different communities.

This lesson was particularly striking for 24-year-old Lizbet Roblero Arreola, who recalled very little exposure to computer programming when she was in school.

“It really opens your eyes and makes you want to change it,” Roblero Arreola said, concerning the misuse of facial recognition data. “For me personally, I want to be somebody in those companies that doesn’t let that happen.”

For Roblero Arreola, a first-generation Mexican American, going to college was never a given. When she became pregnant with her first child shortly after graduating from high school, she decided to keep working in customer service jobs rather than go to college. Last year, after giving birth to her second child, she saw a friend post online about Hack the Hood. She’d been thinking about going back to school, and it seemed Hack the Hood could help ease her transition.

Roblero Arreola said that the Hack the Hood team supported her by helping her understand all the steps she would need to take to enroll at Laney College, including helping her figure out how to apply for financial aid. (Hack the Hood programs are tuition-free, but students who go on to pursue a certificate with Laney have to pay tuition there.)

After she finishes her associate degree in computer programming at Laney, she hopes to transfer to a four-year college and earn a bachelor’s degree. Eventually, she’d like to build a career in the cybersecurity field. She said she’s putting in the work now so that her children will have more opportunities than she did.

Related: Just 3% of scientists and engineers are Black or Latina women. Here’s what teachers are doing about it

These programs also serve students like Nicole Blanchette, an 18-year-old from a rural community in Connecticut, who chose Marcy Lab School over a traditional college experience.

Blanchette’s father has an associate degree, and her mother, who is Filipino, didn’t pursue postsecondary education. Blanchette always dreamed of going to college, and during her senior year of high school, she became intrigued by a career in tech. She hesitated, however, because “the stereotypical computer science student does not look like me.”

But an ad for Marcy Lab on Instagram made Blanchette think a tech career was possible.

She did the math and found that one year of living in New York would be cheaper than attending any of the colleges she’d gotten into, even with financial aid. She convinced her parents to spend the money they’d saved for her education on her living expenses while she attends Marcy.

Ogbonna and Marcy Lab’s other co-founder, Maya Bhattacharjee-Marcantonio, both started out as teachers and recruited the first class of Marcy students from their personal networks and from community organizations in Brooklyn.

Now, roughly 30 to 40 percent of Marcy Lab’s students are coming straight out of high school. Ogbonna said that for some of these students, “academic, economic and social barriers prevent them from being able to access a college that they can verify has strong outcomes.” They often believe they can’t afford any wrong turns. And for those who’ve already had some college, there’s often urgency to get a job because they need to pay back student loans or contribute financially to their households.

“Some of them were thinking about going to the short-term, very expensive coding boot camps,” Ogbunna said, and see a tuition-free program like Marcy Lab as “a less risky option.”

After feeling directionless and uninspired, Hickerson, who first thought about a career in coding after that vivid dream, now says he loves learning, and complex problem-solving tech challenges only make him want to learn more.

Before he started learning to code, he said he never knew what it felt like to be passionate about something. Now, when he talks about coding, what he’s learning in school and the career he hopes to build in software engineering, he doesn’t seem to ever stop smiling.

This story about STEM education programs was produced by The Hechinger Report , a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for our higher education newsletter . Listen to our higher education podcast .

Related articles

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn't mean it's free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Olivia Sanchez HIGHER EDUCATION REPORTER

(212)... More by Olivia Sanchez

Letters to the Editor

At The Hechinger Report, we publish thoughtful letters from readers that contribute to the ongoing discussion about the education topics we cover. Please read our guidelines for more information. We will not consider letters that do not contain a full name and valid email address. You may submit news tips or ideas here without a full name, but not letters.

By submitting your name, you grant us permission to publish it with your letter. We will never publish your email address. You must fill out all fields to submit a letter.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Sign me up for the newsletter!

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• 22 July 2024

What Kamala Harris’s historic bid for the US presidency means for science

• Max Kozlov ,
• Mariana Lenharo 1 &
• Jeff Tollefson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Mariana Lenharo is a news reporter for Nature based in New York City.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

US President Joe Biden has endorsed vice-president Kamala Harris to take his place in the November election. Credit: Andrew Harnik/Getty

After US President Joe Biden ended his re-election campaign on Sunday, he and other senior Democratic politicians threw their support behind current vice-president Kamala Harris. Although the situation could change between now and the official selection of the Democratic candidate for the presidency in August, she is widely expected to face off against former president Donald Trump in the election this November.

Here, Nature talks to policy analysts and researchers about what a potential Harris administration might mean for science, health and the environment.

A background in science and justice

Health and science have been a part of Harris’s life since an early age: her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, whom Harris cites as a major influence, was a leading breast-cancer researcher who died of cancer.

Much of Harris’s career has centred on criminal justice — she served as the district attorney for San Francisco in California from 2004 to 2011 and state attorney general for six years until 2017. She then became a US senator for California.

As senator, Harris co-sponsored efforts to improve the diversity of the science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM) workforce. She introduced legislation to aid students from under-represented populations in obtaining jobs and work experience in STEM fields. And in the race for the Democratic nomination for the 2020 presidential election, she proposed a plan to invest US$60 billion to fund historically Black universities and to bolster Black-owned businesses.

As vice-president, Harris has been chair of the National Space Council, which advises the president on US space policy and strategy. Under her leadership, the body has focused on international cooperation — for example, with the Artemis mission , which aims to send astronauts to the Moon.

It is unclear whom Harris will choose to be her running mate if she receives the party nomination. One contender is Mark Kelly, a Democratic US senator for Arizona and former astronaut with decades of experience in science and engineering.

Health care and drug pricing

During the 2020 Democratic primary race, Harris was to Biden’s left on health-care policy. For one, she endorsed a universal single-payer national health insurance system, although she left room for a role for private insurance companies. Biden preferred tweaking the existing system, which he had helped to engineer through the 2010 Affordable Care Act as vice-president under Barack Obama.

It is still unknown whether she will embrace similar progressive health policies or choose a path that might be more appealing to independent and centrist voters, says Alina Salganicoff, director for women’s health policy at the health-policy research organization KFF, based in San Francisco, California. “I anticipate she’s going to be a staunch defender of maintaining and supporting the Affordable Care Act, which has also been a priority for the Biden campaign,” she says.

The Biden–Harris administration has made drug pricing a key priority by creating a cap for the price of insulin and by endorsing the use of ‘march-in rights’, in which the government could intervene to increase market competition over innovations created using public funds, and thus lower prices. In 2019, as senator, Harris co-sponsored legislation that would have created an independent agency to determine appropriate drug prices.

Peter Maybarduk, director of the access-to-medicines programme at the advocacy organization Public Citizen, based in Washington DC, praises these actions, and hopes they would continue under a potential Harris administration. “The Biden–Harris administration has been by far the strongest yet in challenging outrageous drug prices and starting the country down a long road toward medicine affordability,” he says.

Women’s health

Harris has been more vocal than Biden on abortion rights, especially since they were dramatically curtailed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in 2022. Last December, she launched a nationwide ‘reproductive freedoms’ speaking tour, and in March she became the first US vice-president to make an official visit to an abortion provider.

Abortion rights have been a major issue for US voters, with 63% of the population saying that abortion should be legal in all or most cases according to an April poll by the Pew Research Center in Washington DC. Support for abortion rights is thought to have fuelled important Democratic wins in the past year. “The fact that she’s willing to talk about this is going to be enormous, because that’s a winning issue for Democrats,” says Melissa Murray, a legal scholar specializing in reproductive rights at New York University in New York City. “It’s a major point of differentiation between the two parties and the person who can make that case most clearly to the American public, I think will be in a stronger position.”

Harris’s approach to reproductive justice is not limited to access to contraception and abortion, Murray notes. The vice-president has advocated for maternal-health issues more broadly, highlighting the need to combat implicit bias against Black women in health care. This approach “takes seriously the needs of women of colour, who are perhaps more deeply affected by assaults on reproductive freedom, as we’ve seen in the two years since Dobbs”, Murray says.

Climate and environment

Harris has long promoted action on climate as well as environmental justice, says Leah Stokes, a climate-policy researcher at the University of California, Santa Barbara. As San Francisco district attorney and California attorney general, Harris became a champion for communities on the front lines of fossil-fuel pollution, Stokes says, and she followed a similar path with work on public health and the environment as a senator from 2017 to 2021.

If she is voted in as president in November, Harris is expected to maintain both the momentum and the unprecedented investments that Biden has injected into the climate movement in the United States. This includes upwards of US$1 trillion in funding for clean energy and climate change over a decade, a legislative accomplishment that many energy experts say could sharply reduce US greenhouse-gas emissions over the coming decades.

“Harris and Biden are in lockstep on climate, and that’s exactly what we need,” says Stokes. “Our 2030 goals are right around the corner, and we can’t afford to roll back progress for four more years.”

Nature 632 , 15-16 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02394-6

Reprints and permissions

Related Articles

• Health care
• Climate change

Blocking an inflammatory protein slows the pace of ageing

News & Views 29 JUL 24

V. Craig Jordan obituary: pharmacologist who revolutionized breast cancer treatments

Obituary 25 JUL 24

Blood culture-free ultra-rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Article 24 JUL 24

First map of an ice shelf’s bottom reveals mysterious melt patterns

News 31 JUL 24

Polar bear threat for Arctic researchers

Correspondence 30 JUL 24

Carbon pricing reduces emissions

News & Views 24 JUL 24

Effort to ‘Trump-proof’ US science grows, but will it succeed?

News 26 JUL 24

Exclusive: the Trump administration demoted this climate scientist — now she wants reform

News 24 JUL 24

Boost French research by increasing freedom for scientists and universities

World View 23 JUL 24

Assistant Investigator

The Stowers Institute for Medical Research is seeking applications from visionary researchers for fully-funded Assistant Investigator positions.

Kansas City, Missouri

Stowers Institute for Medical Research.

ICYS Research Fellow, NIMS, Japan

The International Center for Young Scientists (ICYS) of the National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS) invites applications for ICYS Research ...

Tsukuba, Ibaraki (JP)

National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS)

2024 Recruitment notice Shenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology: Shenzhen, China

The wide-ranging expertise drawing from technical, engineering or science professions...

Shenzhen,China

Shenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

The School of Life Sciences at Tsinghua University invites applications for tenure-track or tenured faculty positions at all ranks (Assistant/Ass...

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University (The School of Life Sciences)

Postdoctoral Fellowships: Cancer Diagnosis and Precision Oncology of Gastrointestinal Cancers

We currently have multiple postdoctoral fellowship positions within the multidisciplinary research team headed by Dr. Ajay Goel, professor and foun...

Monrovia, California

Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope, Goel Lab

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Open access
• Published: 24 August 2018

Making sense of “STEM education” in K-12 contexts

• Tamara D. Holmlund   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6132-7873 1 ,
• Kristin Lesseig 1 &
• David Slavit 1  

International Journal of STEM Education volume  5 , Article number:  32 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

68k Accesses

106 Citations

11 Altmetric

Metrics details

Despite increasing attention to STEM education worldwide, there is considerable uncertainty as to what constitutes STEM education and what it means in terms of curriculum and student outcomes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the commonalities and variations in educators’ conceptualizations of STEM education. Sensemaking theory framed our analysis of ideas that were being selected and retained in relation to professional learning experiences in three contexts: two traditional middle schools, a STEM-focused school, and state-wide STEM professional development. Concept maps and interview transcripts from 34 educators holding different roles were analyzed: STEM and non-STEM teachers, administrators, and STEM professional development providers.

Three themes were included on over 70% of the 34 concept maps: interdisciplinary connections; the need for new, ambitious instructional practices in enacting a STEM approach; and the engagement of students in real-world problem solving. Conceptualizations of STEM education were related to educational contexts, which included the STEM education professional development activities in which educators engaged. We also identified differences across educators in different roles (e.g., non-STEM teacher, administrator). Two important attributes of STEM education addressed in the literature appeared infrequently across all contexts and role groups: students’ use of technology and the potential of STEM-focused education to provide access and opportunities for all students’ successful participation in STEM.

Conclusions

Given the variety of institutionalized practices and school contexts within which STEM education is enacted, we are not convinced that a single worldwide definition of STEM education is critical. What we do see as essential is that those working in the same system explore the common elements that are being attributed to STEM education and co-construct a vision that provides opportunities for all their students to attain STEM-related goals. This is especially important in the current reform contexts related to STEM education. We also see that common conceptions of STEM education appear across roles and contexts, and these could provide starting points for these discussions. Explicitly identifying the ideas educators are and are not selecting and retaining can inform professional learning activities at local and larger scales.

Across the world, STEM receives tremendous attention in education reform efforts and in popular media. The International Council of Associations for Science Educators (ICASE 2013 ) recently urged member countries to work together to improve access to, and the quality of, STEM education in order to prepare all students for global citizenry. In the USA, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has played a significant role in the STEM education movement by calling for research related to science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. While the NSF first used the term “SMET,” this was revised into the more euphonic “STEM” in the early 2000s (Patton 2013 ). Shortly thereafter, the US government issued several studies on the state of STEM learning, and the number of schools designated as STEM-focused increased. Numerous legislative actions also emerged at this time related to computer science, STEM teachers, and STEM as career and technology (CTE) education (Gonzalez and Kuenzi 2012 ; Kuenzi 2008 ).

The NSF continues to use the STEM as an overarching title—for example, in requests for proposals—and activity within any one of the four disciplines can fit into the STEM category. For example, engaging elementary children in engineering and design, developing middle-level mathematics curriculum, or studying high school biology students’ understandings about evolution are all STEM activities. However, in the general public and among K-12 educators, “STEM education” is being increasingly viewed as a new concept, one that somehow brings all four disciplines together. One definition that illustrates an integrated perspective of STEM education comes from work in southwest Pennsylvania:

STEM education is an interdisciplinary approach to learning where rigorous academic concepts are coupled with real world lessons as students apply science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in contexts that make connections between school, community, work, and the global enterprise enabling the development of STEM literacy and with it the ability to compete in the new economy. (Southwest Regional STEM Network 2009 , p. 3)

Despite the increasingly common use of the term “STEM education,” there is still uncertainty as to what constitutes STEM education and what it means in terms of curriculum and student outcomes (Breiner et al. 2012 ; Lamberg and Trzynadlowski 2015 ). STEM education can be considered a single or multi-disciplinary field, and in the case of the latter, no clear consensus exists on the nature of the content and pedagogic interplay among the STEM fields. While science and mathematics education are well-defined (though separate) entities across elementary and secondary schools worldwide, engineering education has largely been a function of higher education in the USA. And technology education has traditionally been delegated to vocational education (now called CTE), when included at all in secondary schooling. Given that policymakers, parents, and business communities are calling for STEM education across grade levels and that STEM literacy is viewed as critical for the economic success and health of individuals and nations worldwide (National Science Board 2015 ; STEM Education Coalition 2014 ), it is important to consider the varied meanings that different groups may have for STEM and STEM education. While it may not be necessary, or even feasible, to coalesce around one common definition of STEM education, we argue that without some shared understandings across a system, it is difficult to design and implement curriculum and instruction to promote successful STEM learning for all students.

In this study, we investigated the conceptualizations of STEM education among educators who work in STEM-focused settings. Our analysis centered on identifying the themes that arise in these educators’ conceptualizations. We also looked for possible relationships between these conceptualizations and (a) their professional work context, including relevant supports for professional learning (referred to as context group ), as well as (b) their professional roles (referred to as role group ).

Conceptualizing STEM education

Consistent with many international recommendations, two National Research Council (NRC) reports on successful K-12 STEM programs in the USA described three major and inclusive goals for STEM education: (a) increase the number of STEM innovators and professionals, (b) strengthen the STEM-related workforce, and (c) improve STEM literacy in all citizens (National Research Council 2011a , 2013 ). But what does it mean, at the classroom level, to implement STEM education? Current research suggests that STEM education is an innovation with various instructional models and emphases that are shaping reform in many educational systems (Bybee 2013 ; National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council 2014 ; Wang et al. 2011 ). Emerging research shows a lack of consensus on the content and instructional practices associated with STEM education, with various models being promoted. These include the incorporation of an engineering design process into the curriculum (Lesseig et al. 2017 ; Ring et al. 2017 ; Roehrig et al. 2012 ), a thematic approach centered around contemporary issues or problems that integrates two or more STEM areas (Bybee 2010 ; Zollman 2012 ), and maker-oriented programs such as robotics, coding, and Maker Faires, which may occur outside of the regular school curriculum (Bevan et al. 2014 )).

However, while various models have emerged, an analysis of STEM education does reveal an emerging consensus on the global attributes associated with this innovation. For example, Peters-Burton et al. ( 2014 ) compiled ten “critical components” of STEM high schools, and LaForce et al. ( 2014 ) identified eight “core elements” of STEM schools. At the classroom level, Kelley and Knowles ( 2016 ) provide a conceptual framework for secondary STEM education efforts. As these and other reports informed the content of the professional development for the participants in this study and our a priori coding categories, we next provide brief descriptions of common elements of STEM education.

One significant attribute of STEM-focused schools is the attention to instructional practices that actively engage and support all students in learning rigorous science and mathematics (Kloser 2014 ; LaForce et al. 2014 ; Lampert and Graziani 2009 ; Newmann and Associates 1996 ). These instructional practices are beginning to be known as a core or ambitious teaching (Kloser 2014 ; Whitcomb et al. 2009 ), and professional development that helps teachers develop these practices along with disciplinary content knowledge is often recommended for STEM-focused learning contexts. Other attributes of STEM-focused schools are student learning experiences that incorporate multiple disciplines (an interdisciplinary, integrated, or trans-disciplinary approach) and often include a project- or problem-based approach tied to authentic or real-world contexts (LaForce et al. 2014 ; Peters-Burton et al. 2014 ). Inherent in problem- and project-based learning are opportunities for student growth in twenty-first century skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, creativity, accountability, persistence, and leadership (Buck Institute 2018 ; Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2013 ). These projects often encompass partnerships with STEM professionals and other community members who can help students make connections between school learning, problem solving, and careers. Another important attribute is students’ use of appropriate and innovative technologies in their inquiries, research, and communication. In this study, we explore the extent to which these characteristics or any others were part of educators’ conceptions of STEM education.

Research questions

Our interest in how educators conceptualize STEM education is grounded in our research on STEM schools and our participation as STEM professional development providers. We framed our study around the following question:

What sense have educators made of STEM education after implementing and/or supporting STEM learning experiences?

We were also interested in possible relationships between participants’ professional work contexts or professional roles and the themes they associated with STEM education. Thus, we addressed the following sub-questions in our analysis:

What themes emerge in the conceptualizations of STEM education among educators in a given professional context? What relationships might exist between an individual’s conceptualization of STEM education and the professional context in which she/he works?

What themes emerge in the conceptualizations of STEM education among educators in a given role group? What relationships might exist between an individual’s conceptualization of STEM education and his/her professional role?

Theoretical framework

Understanding the intentions of reform proposals requires implementers to interpret what is meant and foresee implications on curriculum and instruction (Spillane et al. 2002 ). Because we are interested in the ways in which individuals are navigating the complex and novel ideas inherent in STEM education, we use sensemaking as our theoretical framework. Sensemaking theory attends to both the individual processing and the socially interactive work that occurs when a person encounters a gap in or discontinuity between what exists and a proposed change or innovation (Dervin 1992 ). Grounded in cognitive learning theory, sensemaking is a dynamic process where each person draws upon existing knowledge, beliefs, values, experiences, and identity to accommodate or assimilate new concepts (Weick 1995 ).

Sensemaking begins with a real or perceived disruption to the status quo, which may range from a fairly routine change, such as a schedule revision, to radical innovation in curriculum and instruction. Sensemaking involves a continuous cycle of enacting actions to address the disruption, noticing and categorizing aspects of the enactment, selecting elements that are plausible, and retaining those in future actions (see Fig.  1 ). Feedback from multiple sources shapes all these processes (Weick et al. 2005 ). The creation of a “plausible story” (Weick et al. 2005 , p. 410) provides the implementer a way to reconcile the varied requirements, standards, and other ideas associated with a proposal for change within their current situation.

Sensemaking cycle (adapted from Weick et al. 2005 , p. 414)

Sensemaking is situated within social and contextual components that influence the individual (Coburn 2001 ; Spillane et al. 2002 ). Any one person’s conceptualization can be “talked into existence” (Weick et al. 2005 , p. 413), as it is shaped through dialog with others, by the constraints and affordances of the environment, and sometimes by the influence of leaders. Both individual and collective sensemaking can result in a range of meanings. While multiple perspectives are useful in generating ideas, this can also be problematic in terms of how new ideas are implemented. For example, there are numerous accounts of the challenges inherent in translating educational innovations or policies for reform into mathematics and science classrooms due to contrasting vision (Allen and Penuel 2015 ; Fishman and Krajcik 2003 ; Spillane 2001 ). Therefore, in this study, we are most interested in the current status and result of the participants’ sensemaking process rather than documenting the sensemaking process itself. Understanding how various stakeholders conceptualize new curricular or instructional ideas can inform the conversation needed to support professional learning and alleviate challenges to reform.

Research design

“The assumptions and propositions of sensemaking, taken together, provide methodological guidance for framing research questions, for collecting data, and for charting analyses” (Dervin 1992 , p.62). To understand what sense participants made of the information encountered and experiences they had about STEM education, we elicited each participant’s thinking through concept maps and interviews. Concept maps can show the “structure of knowledge” (Novak 1995 , p. 79) by making explicit one’s ideas within a specific domain. Map creators identify ideas associated with the given domain and arrange these in a way to designate which are most salient and which are related but less significant. These main and subordinate ideas are called “nodes.” Connecting lines, arrows, and words written on these connecting lines can be used to show the interrelationships between the major and less significant nodes (Novak and Cañas 2008 ). As learning is contextual and informed by a learner’s previous knowledge (Bruner 1990 ), any two concept maps typically differ in multiple ways.

Concept maps have been used in K-20 education and in professional development to provide insight into how learners are structuring new ideas with existing understandings (Adesope and Nesbit 2009 ; Besterfield-Sacre et al. 2004 ; Greene et al. 2013 ; Markham et al. 1994 ). The act of map creation requires reflection on events, experiences, and ideas and, thus, is a sensemaking activity: “How can I know what I think until I see what I say?” (Weick et al. 2005 , p. 416). In addition, concept maps allow participants time to make sense of what they think. The maps can then be used in interviews to provide focal points for further sensemaking (Linderman et al. 2011 ), with opportunities for the creator to elaborate and clarify the components and structures of the map.

While sensemaking is ultimately individualistic, the ideas and experiences that contribute to this occur in the context of organizations, conversation, shared activity, and feedback loops (Weick et al. 2005 ).

Sense-making does assume that the individual is situated in cultural/historical moments in time-space and that culture, history, and institutions define much of the world within which the individual lives . . . the individual’s relationship to these moments and the structures that define them is always a matter of self-construction. (Dervin 1992 , p. 67)

In line with this theoretical perspective, the unit of analysis for our study is the individual. We report on this analysis to answer our first research question. We also recognize that each individual has a professional role and is situated within particular institutional structures and cultures and that both the responsibilities of one’s role and the context inform one’s conceptualization of STEM education. As such, we also noted the roles of each participant and developed rich descriptions of the professional contexts in which participants worked. These descriptions, in conjunction with participants’ concept maps and interviews, allowed us to look for relationships among participants’ conceptualizations of STEM education, their professional contexts (sub-question A), and their professional roles and responsibilities (sub-question B).

Participants

Thirty-four people participated in this study. Each was affiliated with STEM education endeavors in one of three context groups . Thirteen participants were teachers and administrators at an inclusive, STEM-focused secondary school (Ridgeview STEM Academy Footnote 1 ). Another 12 were teachers from two traditional middle schools who participated in a 2-year professional development project that supported their implementation of engineering design challenges with their students. Nine were STEM educators and stakeholders participating as faculty in a statewide professional development (PD) institute designed to assist district or school teams with the creation of a STEM education implementation plan. The professional roles of each participant are shown in Table  1 .

Some participants in each context group held dual roles (e.g., Shawn was both a science and an engineering/CTE teacher; Will and Michelle were both non-STEM teachers and administrators). For the purpose of this analysis, the role they most strongly identified with at the time they completed the concept map was used to determine the role groups . The selection of these participants from the larger pool of teachers and administrators at all three schools was based on their participation in two larger research projects. The professional development faculty were included as participants to provide data from a group with very different contexts and, possibly, perspectives. Given the frequent lack of communication and difference in vision among groups associated with reform efforts (Spillane et al. 2002 ), it was important to get a snapshot of the thinking of a group situated outside of classrooms and schools.

Professional work contexts

We describe the professional work contexts of each of our participants. With regard to the participants from Ridgeview STEM Academy and from the two traditional middles schools, we focus on the characteristics of the school and the supports teachers received for their professional learning. In the case of the statewide PD faculty, we focus primarily on their leadership roles in the context of a statewide STEM education leadership institute.

Ridgeview STEM Academy

The participants in this context group were from Ridgeview STEM Academy (RSA), an inclusive STEM-focused school that opened in 2012 with nine teachers and students in grades 6, 7, and 9. The student population was intended to mirror the demographics of the district, and admission was obtained through a lottery by zip code. During the focus year of this study, RSA had approximately 400 students in grades 6–12 and 22 teachers. District-provided professional development associated with learning about the school vision, culture, and practices has been provided since the opening of the school, but teachers have predominantly made sense of STEM education as they implement it. The RSA vision statement described the student learning experience as one that would support the student as a “learner, collaborator, designer, and connector” and the faculty nurtured the growth of a school identity as a place where students had “voice and choice.” STEM learning was viewed as possible for all students, and the curriculum was envisioned as a project- or problem-based (Buck Institute 2018 ) and connected to “the real world of business and research.”

Teachers collaborated across the school year to develop their own interdisciplinary, project-based curricula and used overarching themes to integrate the humanities and STEM disciplines. They accessed a variety of resources as they experimented with the types of instructional practices needed to enact the school vision in the context of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) (National Governors Association 2010 ) and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) (Achieve 2013 ). Teachers explicitly supported building student skills and attitudes, such as persistence in problem solving, curiosity and a willingness to learn from failure, creative thinking, and the ability to work independently and collaboratively. The technology received attention from the start. Each student was provided a laptop loaded with design, research, and communication tools, and the school offered specific classes dedicated to the use of this technology. Bringing STEM professionals into the school and taking students out to explore STEM careers and work was an explicit focus, with a half-time position created to develop partnerships to support this. The administration assisted teachers in curriculum development by encouraging curricular risk-taking and continuous improvement.

The first and third authors conducted research at this school over a 5-year period (Slavit et al. 2016 ). We invited teachers who participated in our long-term study on STEM schools to participate in this investigation about sensemaking of STEM education. Interviews for this study were conducted with 13 RSA teachers and administrators over an 18-month period.

Traditional Middle Schools (TrMS)

This context group was composed of teachers from two middle schools (Rainier and Hood) in a large suburban school district. Both schools had traditional approaches to education, including a seven-period day and distinct courses for each content area (e.g., physical science, algebra, state history). Limited structures for teacher collaboration existed, and teachers’ interactions typically were by discipline and grade level. Each school had approximately 850 students in grades 6–8; 50% of these students came from low-income households, as determined by their qualification for free or reduced-price lunch.

Thirty-four science, mathematics, special education, and English language teachers from these two schools participated in Teachers Exploring STEM Integration (TESI), a 2-year professional development project that included a 2-week summer institute and ongoing support throughout the school years. Twelve of the 34 teachers participated in this study. TESI focused on the integration of STEM design challenges (DCs) into the existing middle school curriculum (Lesseig et al. 2016 ). An interdisciplinary team composed of scientists, mathematicians, and educators from a local university, community college, and school district developed several DCs that could be incorporated into the district’s existing mathematics and science curricula. The professional learning experiences in TESI were explicitly designed to model integrated STEM curricula aligned with math, science, and ELA standards. Authentic mathematical, scientific, and engineering practices received specific and ongoing attention, especially the identification and clarification of the problem; the importance of research, solution testing, failure, and feedback; and the development of evidence-based explanations. Teachers were provided with the literature about and video examples of core instructional practices (e.g., https://ambitiousscienceteaching.org ) specific to mathematics and science. Teachers were also supported in making sense of an engineering design cycle and reflecting on the attributes of a strong design challenge in relation to the student learning experience. The need for and value of STEM learning was also contextualized in terms of twenty-first century challenges and opportunities for innovation.

During the first week of each summer session, teachers engaged in STEM DCs to support their learning about the relevant disciplinary content and to gain familiarity with the engineering design process. During the second summer week, middle school students identified by their teachers as struggling in mathematics or science were invited to attend each morning session; teachers worked alongside the students to solve a design challenge. Engineering, mathematics, and science professors from the university and a variety of other professionals (e.g., a prosthetics designer, a government climate scientist) interacted with the teachers and students. Teachers spent the afternoons reflecting on the students’ engagement, analyzing instructional practices, and planning for the implementation of design challenges in their classrooms. While undertaking design challenges, teachers and students were involved in collaborative and creative problem solving, communication, and critical thinking. The use of various forms of technology was modeled during the professional development summer institutes. The recognition that every student could be a successful contributor to solving a design challenge was also an explicit element of the TESI project.

The second author was the PI for TESI, and the other two authors were involved in the planning and advisory committees. The teachers interviewed for this study were in the TESI project for 2 years and also participated in a study of the implementation of ideas from that project. Participants from one school included eight eighth-grade mathematics, science, STEM, English as a second language, and special education teachers. Participants from the second school included four sixth-grade teachers of mathematics, science, STEM, and special education (see Table  1 ). All were interviewed in the fall of the second year of the project.

Statewide professional development faculty

The professional work context for each of these nine participants was different than that of the TrMS and RSA educators. All shared a common experience as leaders in a statewide STEM education leadership institute. Yet, each came from a different professional context, and they collectively held a variety of professional roles (see Table  1 ).

The PD faculty were responsible for developing and implementing a week-long summer institute on STEM education and leadership for school and district teams from across the state. The institute focused on the development of and leadership for an implementation plan for STEM education. The content of the institute was grounded in the NGSS, CCSS, and CTE standards ( https://careertech.org ) and informed by the NRC ( 2011a , 2011b ) reports on STEM education. In addition, each faculty member brought a wealth of expertise relevant to STEM education from their professional roles external to this initiative; for example, one was a principal of an elementary STEM school and another a scientist at a national laboratory (see Table  1 ). Many were involved with science and mathematics PD at local and regional levels. Across the year, these institute faculty members developed a list of relevant resources that could be useful to institute participants, including model STEM schools, websites, research and practitioner literature, curricula, and STEM activities. Across multiple meetings, the faculty drew upon these resources and their own expertise to develop sessions for the summer institute. Various sessions focused on the meaning and value of STEM education, including how to integrate isolated school subjects and provide connections to the real-world needs and careers, the importance of partnerships between STEM educators and STEM professionals, equity in STEM learning opportunities, and how to anticipate and address common challenges associated with change. Thus, preparation for and implementation of the various sessions in this institute provided opportunities for all faculty members to share their expertise and clarify key ideas about STEM education.

The PD faculty were invited to participate in this study as their perspectives give us insight into how educators who are promoting the innovation are conceptualizing it, what they identify as important, and the extent to which the messages they convey are coherent and consistent. They created their concept maps during the first of a 2-day planning meeting for the summer STEM education institute. The first author was a member of this faculty and had worked with all but two of the members for at least 5 years.

Data collection

Based on our long-term work within each of the three contexts, we had in-depth information about the STEM-relevant contexts for each of the three participant groups, and the actions group members were asked to take. The above descriptions of each of these contexts were developed in order to address sub-question A about potential relationships between contextual elements and participants’ sensemaking about STEM education.

To capture participants’ conceptualizations of STEM education, we asked them to construct concept maps and used follow-up interviews to clarify the meaning of map elements. At the time of the interviews, each participant had implemented some kind of STEM education-related action multiple times and had opportunities to individually and collectively make sense (envision, enact, select, retain) of STEM education. Initially, each participant was asked if they were familiar with concept mapping and, if needed, given a brief overview about representing concepts and sub-concepts hierarchically. They were asked to construct a concept map in response to two questions: “What is your understanding or conception of STEM education? and What do you see as the most important ideas and sub-ideas?” Due to contextual constraints, participants created their concept maps in varied settings. The participants from the three schools were invited to meet with researchers in pairs or individually at a time convenient to them. The PD faculty developed their concept maps individually while all were in the same room. Each person was given as much time as needed to develop her/his map. The researcher read or wrote while participants were constructing their maps to alleviate potential discomfort. Participants were not held to using a traditional hierarchical structure in their mapping; as such, map formats ranged widely (Figs.  2 and 3 ).

Hierarchically arranged concept map from Hunter, RSA

Non-traditional concept map, Bridget, PD faculty

After concept mapping, semi-structured interviews were used to provide participants with another opportunity to make sense of their ideas about STEM education and inform the research findings. TrMS and RSA participants were interviewed immediately after constructing their maps. Due to time constraints, clarification of the maps of the PD faculty was done informally over the duration of the faculty meeting rather than with semi-structured interviews. However, for three PD faculties who constructed non-traditional concept maps (e.g., Fig.  3 ), semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted. Participants were asked to “talk us through” their concept maps. The interviewer would then follow up on a particular idea or ask a participant to elaborate on specific ideas they brought up. The researcher also asked what, if any, questions participants had about STEM education, and what supported them in coming to these particular views of STEM education. In cases where interviews were conducted in pairs, participants were asked to compare and contrast their maps or to comment on specific ideas that may have appeared on a colleagues’ map. For some participants, the interview prompted them to make modifications to the map or express additional ideas that were not on the map. For others, the interview did not result in additional information. In explaining the components of the map, participants could notice what they had included (or not) and how they had portrayed relationships between ideas.

Data analysis

Concept maps can be analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively (Greene et al. 2013 ). A quantitative analysis involves counting nodes (concepts), hierarchies (chains of sub-concepts out of one node), and cross-links between hierarchies to infer the complexity of the map creator’s understanding of the concept being represented. However, because we allowed each participant to represent their thinking in whatever way it made personal sense, some of the participants’ maps did not readily translate to quantitative analyses (e.g., did not include identifiable nodes or were global in nature, see Fig.  3 ). We chose to analyze the concept maps qualitatively and analyzed the interview data concurrently to aid our interpretation of the concept maps. We looked at the maps holistically, attending to the overall structure, the words used as nodes, and words used as cross-links. These analyses led to our primary results on the participants’ views of STEM education, including the emergence of our themes, and a secondary quantitative synthesis of each theme’s frequency across the participants’ context groups and role groups.

Generating themes

We drew on current research on STEM education as well as a grounded approach based on our interviews with teachers to generate our initial themes (Breiner et al. 2012 ; LaForce et al. 2014 ; Peters-Burton et al. 2014 ; Sanders 2009 ). We developed nine initial themes and added three others as the coding progressed. The initial themes were a synthesis of the way participants represented or talked about the attributes of STEM education and the major attributes that are described across the literature. For example, because project- or problem-based learning (PBL) tends to be situated in real-world contexts, we originally had one theme for PBL that included real-world connections. However, on a majority of concept maps, there were distinct nodes for real-world problem solving and others for attributes that characterized the student learning experience, regardless of whether it was within a PBL approach. Thus, we created different themes for these two distinct aspects of STEM education (RWPS, StLE; see Table  2 ).

The three codes (Val, TchNd, ChPrb in Table  2 ) were added later in the coding process to better capture significant themes that emerged in our analysis. For example, when we began coding the concept maps of the PD faculty, we saw ideas that related to opportunities to practice twenty-first century skills through PBL but also referred more generally to creating a STEM-literate citizenry. Thus, we created a separate theme to capture this more global perspective. Specifically, we coded nodes that focused predominantly on the abilities and dispositions of each student to communicate, work collaboratively, think creatively, or persevere in problem solving as “twenty-first century skills” (21CS). Nodes that reflected a broader conceptualization related to global citizenship and STEM literacy as having economic and other societal benefits were recoded as “value of STEM literacy” (Val).

We also developed two themes to reflect nodes associated with the conditions needed for implementing STEM-oriented teaching or curriculum. Ideas associated with what teachers might need in order to implement STEM education such as content knowledge and time for collaborative planning were coded as “teacher needs” (TchNd). Challenges and problems in implementing STEM education (ChPrb) showed up on some concept maps or, more frequently, emerged during the interviews. These responses ranged from structural constraints, such as lack of collaborative planning time or students in one class not having the same mathematics and science teachers (preventing extending projects across two class periods), to the politicization of STEM education.

Thematic analysis

In January 2015, the first author analyzed each map from the TrMS and RSA participants, generating themes based on the words participants used as nodes (concepts and sub-concepts) and cross-links (e.g., a line labeled “supplement each other” drawn between the nodes for “science” and “math” would be coded as IntDis for integration). Coding rules were developed and used to clarify the coding themes. In August 2015, PD institute faculty maps were obtained and coded by the first author, and coding rules were further elaborated. In September 2015, the second two authors and a research assistant coded six concept maps. After discussions with the first author, coding rules were further clarified and made more specific, especially to distinguish between student learning experiences and instructional practices. To check the reliability of our thematic coding on complex, non-traditional maps, the first author conducted follow-up interviews with three of the PD faculty and found that the initial coding accurately represented the mapmaker’s intentions. Based on the revised and/or clarified coding rules, the first author recoded all 34 concept maps, using the interview transcripts and concept maps concurrently. As the interview protocol probed for explanations about each map element, the transcripts helped clarify meanings or validate interpretations of cross-links and nodes.

Quantifying the themes

We coded 34 concept maps as described above and then counted how many people included each theme in their concept maps. After all maps were coded for the themes, we counted the occurrence of each theme, recorded these for each individual, and compiled the total inclusion of each theme. This allowed us to respond to our main research question. To address our two sub-questions, we then looked at the frequency of theme inclusion for each context group (RSA, TrMS, PD faculty) and also determined the frequency of inclusion of each theme by general role groups: STEM teachers (18 secondary math, science, technology, engineering, CTE teachers), non-STEM teachers (5 secondary special education or ELL teachers), school or district administrators (5), and non-school-based external partners (6 partners from businesses or organizations or regional PD providers). We present a discussion of our analyses in the next section.

Limitations

The use of concept maps to elicit conceptualizations of STEM education has multiple limitations. Although we allowed participants to construct their maps in non-traditional ways, including writing a paragraph instead of mapping, some may have felt uncomfortable portraying their ideas using this type of representation or may not have included all their ideas. While the interviews provided an opportunity for participants to add to or expand upon their representations, participants may have held ideas they did not want to share, lacked the ability or language to represent, or perhaps were not considering at the time of the interview. Moreover, participants may not have mentioned certain ideas they perceived as obvious, such as the inclusion of all students in STEM experiences. There are also limitations related to the participant pool. There were limited numbers of non-STEM teachers (5), administrators (5), and external partners (6) in comparison with the number of STEM teachers (18) who participated. However, the concept maps and interviews with all participants provide insight into the variation that is possible in making sense of STEM education.

We address our main research question by showing the frequency of the various themes relevant to STEM education (coding categories) that were included in individual concept maps (Table  3 ) and providing examples that show different individual’s conceptualizations of the theme at the time. We then address sub-question A by showing the frequency of theme inclusion by context group (Table  4 ) and examining relationships between the conceptualizations of STEM education and the context in which participants implemented STEM education activities. Finally, we address sub-question B by organizing the themes by role group (Table  5 ) and discussing potential relationships between the responsibilities inherent in specific roles and the elements of STEM education that surfaced in the concept maps among participants in that role. Our data suggest that certain aspects of STEM education are more salient in participants’ conceptions, and both context and role group contribute to these conceptions.

Making sense of STEM education

We first tabulated the inclusion of theme by individuals and calculated the percentage of participants who included each theme. As shown in Table  3 , there were three common themes on the concept maps: a connection across disciplinary subjects (IntDis), a focus on what teachers must attend to instructionally (InstPrac) when implementing a STEM approach, and explicit connections between in-school content and out-of-school problems or contexts (RWPS).

Interview data provided detail on how each participant conceptualized these themes. For example, when asked what her inclusion of the word “integration” meant (IntDis), a special education teacher from the TrMS group explained:

The reading, the writing, the art, the creativity. You know? You’re using computer skills. You’re using building skills. … So it makes [students] use everything. And the cool thing is they don’t know they’re using all that. (Brenda, interview, January 29, 2015)

A member of the PD faculty who was also the principal of an elementary STEM school talked about how real-world problems helped the teachers develop integrated curricula:

What we do is intentionally interweave the S, the T, the E, the M into instruction. So, at a typical elementary or middle school, often subjects are segmented and segregated, kind of siloed. Our commitment is that our students are doing STEM every day … . We intentionally plan STEM … we take the standards and cut them all apart and then piece them all together so we have consistent themes or overarching problems for students to solve. (Bridget interview, September 30, 2015)

A middle school science teacher from RSA also included real-world connections and instructional decision-making on his map. In his interview, he explained why real-world connections were important and how he developed these:

And so I started with real world scenarios, just because to me the science, technology, engineering and mathematics, kind of the end goal is getting students more fully prepared for real life. And so having them deal with real world scenarios helps them to do that. Couple of different ways to do that, one I had input from professionals … .And then opportunities to see and experience that real world, or real work, environment or conditions. (Hunter interview, November 4, 2014)

Participants represented these three themes (integration, real-world connections, and instructional practices) separately on their maps but, as seen by these comments, often revealed significant relationships among these themes in their interviews.

Over half of all participants included attributes of students’ learning experiences (StLE) and students’ opportunities to develop twenty-first century skills (21CS) as salient features of STEM education. Ideas related to the attributes of the student learning experience were represented on 59% of concept maps. Comments about this often addressed students’ engagement in the authentic practices of each discipline. A high school math teacher at RSA explained that “Kids should be looking for patterns, engaged in the real work of scientists and mathematicians” (Greg, October 19, 2015). A scientist who was a member of the PD faculty described that the student learning experience should involve “designing and developing within constraints [as this] models real world scenarios. .. realizing it is okay to learn from failure and that there isn’t just one right answer all the time” (Sophie interview, September 30, 2015).

The opportunity for students to develop and practice twenty-first century skills and dispositions was also included on over half of the concept maps. Participants listed specific skills, such as collaboration, communication, and perseverance. Expanding on this area in interviews, some connected these skills to career and life opportunities. As a TrMS math teacher described:

I think the end goal, what I would really want is students who can problem solve. … Life problems, work problems, I mean for years I’ve just thought employers just want employees who can think and take care of the problems at hand. Not have to be told, “Do this, do this, do this.” And so if you’re a problem solver you’re going to be a great employee. If you’re a problem solver you’re going to be a great inventor. (Olivia interview, January 26, 2015)

Less than one third of the participants included an explicit reference to STEM education as providing opportunities for all students to participate and be successful (Equ). Also, less than one third included ideas about technology (Tech), other than to write the word “technology” as part of STEM. We further discuss the low representation of these categories in the next section.

Making sense of STEM education in different contexts

In this section, we address sub-question A regarding the themes educators in different professional contexts included in their conceptualizations of STEM education and the possible relationships between an individual’s conception of STEM education and the context in which she/he works. We first calculated the frequency of the inclusion of each theme for each context group. Table  4 shows that within context groups, different categories were more salient than others. We draw from our descriptions of the PD and school environments to consider potential relationships between the attributes of each context group’s STEM education work and the themes that were most or least commonly identified within that group.

Aside from the attributes common across all participants (interdisciplinary, instructional practices, and real-world problem solving), the statewide PD faculty, a group composed of people with a wide variety of backgrounds, commonly focused on broader concepts such as the global, societal value of STEM education (Val). This was also an overall theme of the summer STEM leadership institute developed by the PD faculty. The maps from the PD faculty also highlighted partnerships (Prtnr) between STEM professionals, teachers, and students. Claudia, a regional PD provider, indicated that STEM education benefits from community connections with “professionals in STEM, professionals related to STEM, informal science educators” and “benefits with support from parents, community professionals, and administrators” (Claudia concept map, May 7, 2015). The development of partnerships between schools and STEM professionals was addressed in multiple sessions during the institute, and two thirds of the PD faculty retained ideas about this attribute of STEM education when constructing their concept maps.

Ideas related to technology (Tech) were not commonly included on the PD faculty maps. Three of the four who included technology were people who worked most directly with it: the STEM school principal whose third- through eighth-grade students all had iPod touches or laptops, one of the business partners, and the district-level CTE director. On the fourth map that included technology, the strand of ideas was “STEM education ➔ multiple academic subjects ➔ technology [is] ill-defined” (Abel concept map, May 7, 2015). Abel’s notation is indicative of the confusion around what the T in STEM education means. At the institute, an invited presenter described how K-12 educators are uncertain about whether technology now means computer science, students’ and teachers’ use of information and communication technology (e.g., the internet; word processing and presentation tools), or tools more commonly found in CTE courses, such as 3D printers.

Forty-four percent of the PD faculty included an explicit relationship between STEM education and equitable learning opportunities (Equ), using phrases such as “teaching every child” (Marion concept map, May 7, 2015). Carlton expanded on this perspective: “It’s about the individual kid, not the industrial model of kids [coming through school]” (Carlton interview, September 30, 2015). Equity was a major theme of the institute, including a focused session at the beginning of the week and embedded in multiple sessions throughout.

Only one third of the PD faculty included standards (Stan), although standards received significant attention in a number of sessions during the institute. Also, less than half of this group included ideas about the student learning experience (StLE) or twenty-first century skills (21CS). The nature of the student experience in a STEM learning environment was modeled in a half-day session, although ideas about students’ opportunities to practice and develop twenty-first century skills were more implicit across sessions. The roles of PD faculty outside of the context of the institute might better explain why these three themes were not more frequently included on the concept maps of this group. We will discuss that in a subsequent section.

As shown in Table  4 , 50% or more of the participants in the TrMS group included attributes directly related to curriculum and instruction: interdisciplinary curriculum, ambitious instructional practices, attributes of students’ learning experiences, twenty-first century skills, standards, and real-world problem solving, in that order. These themes directly relate to elements of the professional development the teachers participated in for 2 years, where STEM design challenges were presented as a way to integrate standard-based mathematics and science content into existing curricula.

Over 50% of the participants from these two traditional middle schools also included ideas about various challenges associated with the implementation of STEM education (ChPrb). This reflects the constraints presented by their school contexts, including “time for planning” and “difficulties with creating in-depth integrated math and science problems.” Another challenge related to school structures that inhibited enacting the interdisciplinary, project-based curriculum units they were exploring in the TESI PD project. An eighth-grade science teacher explained:

The way our building is lined up or our schedule is we’re not in teams by any means. I mean my kids go off and see three different math teachers. So if it was ideal they’d have one math teacher, one science teacher, one humanities and we could do a little bit more of that integration, true integration. (Anthony interview, December 9, 2014).

Over 50% of the TrMS participants included references to standards (Stan) on their maps or mentioned these in interviews. Again, the context was important. Many of the comments reflected a negative relationship between the need to address standards and the desire to enact interdisciplinary, project-based curricula. Shawn, an eighth-grade teacher who had developed a new STEM elective course, commented on standards in this way:

I mean [this STEM course] is a great opportunity and I hope others get the chance and embrace it and run with it because I think it’s got a chance to be really successful and get some kids far better prepared for the real world than just learning back again state standards and stuff. I’ve probably been negative about state standards in my comments, and they’re important, but I don’t know that they focus enough on the STEM related skills, the integration of all this stuff to give kids successful opportunities to fulfill roles in business as problem solvers. (Interview, December 9, 2014)

These participants worked in two traditional middle schools in a district and state context where teachers were attempting to understand how to support students in meeting CCSS for mathematics and language arts, as measured by state achievement test data. Teachers were also just becoming familiar with the NGSS, both through the TESI project and other regional and district-level PD events. While the curricular units provided by the TESI project were aligned, the other instructional materials provided by the district were purchased prior to these new standards.

Ideas related to the access and opportunity for all students (Equ) were included on one third of the TrMS participants’ maps. The TESI summer institute was designed to help teachers recognize ways to support all students’ successful participation in STEM learning. For a week, students who had struggled with the content of their math or science courses joined their teachers in tackling engineering design challenges. Only four teachers explicitly identified this as an important feature of STEM education. A sixth-grade math teacher stated: “All kids bring skills, everyone’s good at something, no one’s good at everything” (Regan concept map, January 29, 2015) and a sixth-grade special education teacher constructed this strand on her map: “STEM education ➔ very inclusive ➔ kids of many levels can access something” (Brenda concept map, January 29, 2015). Others may have implied ideas about equity in other aspects of their concept maps, but there were no other explicit words or ideas either on maps or in interviews that we could code for this theme.

Three themes were seldom included or not included at all. Only one person from the TrMS group included ideas related to technology (Tech) and connecting it to “research skills.” This is not too surprising for traditional schools; one teacher pointed out the non-working Wi-Fi router on her classroom ceiling, and others commented that CTE classes were the only places where students could access technological tools. Students’ use of technology in the form of robotics was modeled in the summer PD but received little explicit attention other than that. Partnerships (Prtnr) and a broader value for STEM education (Val) did not appear on any concept maps in the TrMS group. While a variety of STEM professionals contributed to the activities of the summer institute, the development of partnerships in relation to supporting students’ interests in STEM careers and learning opportunities was not an explicit element of the PD.

Similar to the TrMS group, the participants from RSA most frequently included themes directly related to the classroom (IntDis, RWPS, InstPrac, StLE, 21CS; see Table  4 ). Also, over 50% of the RSA participants included partnerships (Prtnr) as an element of STEM education. This reflected a focus of their school philosophy, where building sustainable partnerships was supported with a half-time faculty position dedicated to cultivating business and academic partners to support student learning. The high school art teacher connected “relevance to real-world experiences” to “work-based learning and internships” (Josh concept map, October 15, 2015) and the principal represented this theme with a connection from STEM education to “extended learning opportunities and mentors” (Sandra concept map, June 4, 2015).

Similar to the other context groups, only 5 of the 13 participants from RSA included ideas about technology (Tech), although the technology was an explicit component of the school. A middle school history and language arts teacher who did include technology on his map explained why he positioned it as one of the major nodes: “I feel technology is embedded into everything. Because technology is just something that helps make the job easier” (Jason interview, November 4, 2014). The robotics and pre-engineering teacher discussed her vision for how technology should be integral to a STEM school:

I think for STEM education, space is very important and that’s one thing that we lack here. For maker space, fabrication projects, things like that. I mean both room as well as having the tools available. So C&C machines, we have a 3D printer but we haven’t been trained on using it yet. You know I mean just . . . any type of thing that you can think that a student might want to use to create. (Rachel interview, November 6, 2014)

The technology was of great importance to some of the RSA participants but not considered by the majority.

Ideas related to standards (Stan) were included on less than one third of the concept maps of the participants from RSA. While these teachers worked in the same state context as the TrMS teachers, they were located in a different district. More importantly, their school context differed. Teachers may have been more focused on the need to develop curriculum to address the school vision of interdisciplinary, project-based learning than to align with standards. However, the high school science teacher was very focused on the NGSS and developed two relevant strands on his concept map, one that connected STEM education ➔ integration ➔ 3D teaching ➔ science practices, concepts, and cross-cutting ideas, and another that connected STEM education to the K-12 Framework (National Research Council 2012 ). Alternately, the high school math teacher talked at length about how the pressures from testing specific standards at specific times was a roadblock to project-based learning: “I could develop a four-year program that would get kids to all standards, but the way it’s going now. .. we are trying to fill in skill gaps so how can we get into that real world stuff?” (Greg interview, October 19, 2015).

Finally, few of the RSA participants (15%) included or talked about opportunities for all students in STEM education (Equ). The principal wrote, “Do everything you can to support student success – make it happen” as the overarching concept on her map, and further explained in her interview:

You do everything you can to support student success and you make it happen. That’s what we’re after. Because every child can learn, every child wants to learn and be successful. And we just have practices and things in place in K-12 that separate out, that rank, and we know in our hearts and in our minds that not all students learn everything at the same pace, the same rate. It doesn’t mean they can’t learn or they won’t learn. (Sandra interview, June 4, 2015)

Also, the robotics teacher connected the curriculum ideas on her map to the challenge she faced in getting more girls interested in STEM areas (Rachel interview, November 6, 2014). Others did not specifically reference ideas related to equitable student opportunities. RSA opened as an inclusive STEM school and from conversations with RSA teachers separate from the data collection for this study, we know teachers are well aware of the need to support all kinds of students in STEM learning. However, based on the concept map data and interviews, teachers were not making explicit connections between the “most important ideas about STEM education” and opportunities for all students.

Making sense of STEM education by role group

Given the multiple roles represented by the participants in this study, we next examined whether there would be notable similarities or differences in the conceptualizations of STEM education based on participants’ professional responsibilities (sub-question B; Table  5 ). Table  5 is organized in descending order of the most commonly included concept map themes by individual participants, making for an easy comparison between the global findings (reported in Table  3 ) and the frequency of inclusion by role group. Teachers of STEM-specific courses comprised the largest group, with 18 participants. Thus, it is not surprising that the most commonly included themes by individual and by context group are also those that STEM teachers most commonly included. Science, mathematics, technology, and CTE teachers are directly responsible for implementing the individually and/or collectively constructed vision of STEM education. They must identify or develop interdisciplinary curricula (IntDis) and determine how to bridge from in-school to real-world problems (RWPS). They understand that supporting students in the project- or problem-based learning experiences (StLE) will require instructional approaches that may differ from traditional, teacher-centered practices (InstPrac).

The interdisciplinary nature of STEM learning was by far the most salient feature for non-STEM teachers as well, and a significant focus by the administrators and external partners.

The art teacher from RSA explained:

I added art in there because I feel like that’s important. Turning it into STEAM. But like literally every single thing is intermingled. Like it’s a melting pot. All of it just goes together. Basically no matter what assignment, project, anything you pick you can connect every single one of these STEM or STEAM aspects into one another. (Brittany interview, November 10, 2014).

Real-world problem solving (RWPS) and ideas about instructional practices (InstPrac) were also included by the majority of non-STEM teachers, but the remaining themes were not consistently included. Many of the non-STEM teachers connected the need for an interdisciplinary approach to real-world problem solving yet faced challenges in connecting this approach to the standards they felt necessary to address. A sixth-grade special education teacher in the TrMS group explained that she wanted to bring in “Kind of authentic experiences and real-world [problems]” yet found that “it’s hard to integrate the 6th grade standards with STEM. I wish we had more time.” (Brenda interview, January 29, 2015).

School and district administrators all included ideas related to instructional practices, and most also included ideas about the student learning experience (StLE) and interdisciplinary curricula (IntDis). Administrators largely recognized most of the thematic elements of STEM education, except for the more global value (Val). In comparison, nearly all the external partners (regional PD providers and business or organization partners) included ideas related to this broader value of STEM education (Val) as well as connections to real-world problems (RWPS). Similar to all the role groups, the interdisciplinary nature of STEM curricula (IntDis) was included by most. External partners included external partnerships at a higher frequency than other groups.

As in the case of PD context, there is an indication in these data that the responsibilities of one’s specific job contribute to the elements of STEM education that are retained. Administrators, who tend to have responsibilities that relate to a large number of educational issues, gave explicit attention to numerous elements. Similarly, the broader outlook of the external partners, reflected in their attention to global values of STEM education in their concept maps, is consistent with their duties and responsibilities inside the STEM education system.

The ways in which the teacher participants made sense of STEM education was also consistent with their roles and responsibilities. Most teachers found interdisciplinary and real-world connections to be especially relevant. However, STEM teachers were also more likely to consider content standards, instructional approaches commonly associated with STEM education such as project-based learning, and twenty-first century skills in their conceptions. Non-STEM teachers were much more attentive to more general attributes of instruction, such as student-centered practices, engagement, and participation.

Those working with the implementation of STEM education are well aware that while core elements have been identified (Kelley and Knowles 2016 ; LaForce et al. 2014 ), there are still varying conceptions of what a STEM school or program entails. In this way, enacting STEM education entails innovation and motivates sensemaking. Our research shows that even when educators have similar professional learning experiences and/or work in the same contexts, they may make sense of what this innovation means quite differently. What is seen as most important to attend to or innovate around may differ in relation to professional roles and contexts.

Sensemaking provided a useful framework (Fig.  1 ) for considering the influence of institutional and professional contexts in shaping each educator’s construction of a plausible story of STEM education. Context appears to have some relationship with the ideas about STEM education noticed and retained by participants. This is most apparent in relation to partnerships, a key feature of the PD faculty work and of RSA. The identity of RSA as a STEM school supported teachers’ sensemaking about elements associated with STEM education such as interdisciplinary curricula, project-based learning, inclusion, and partnerships; these were part of the school vision statement. On the other hand, the professional identities of non-STEM teachers (e.g, English or history teachers) and STEM teachers shaped their individual meaning-making in relation to a STEM-focused curriculum. Teachers at the two middle schools were enacting STEM curricula in the context of a traditional middle school, with compartmentalized science and mathematics and a curricular focus aligned with statewide tests. Given these constraints, teachers in a more traditional school context may not take up ideas about STEM education that they encounter in professional learning experiences as readily as those in a STEM school context. The PD faculty worked in various professional contexts, with most in non-school settings. The STEM education ideas most salient to these scientists, business partners, and regional educators differed notably from those of STEM and non-STEM teachers.

In addition to the influence of institutional and organizational contexts, opportunities for collective reflection on the enactment of ideas associated with STEM education also contribute to an individual’s sensemaking (Davis 2003 ). Talking about actions involves “sensegiving,” which serves both to give information or feedback to others as well as an opportunity to “hear what one thinks” and further develop a plausible story (Weick et al. 2005 , p. 416). For the TrMS teachers, there was an ongoing dialog with their colleagues, the PD providers, their instructional coaches, and their administrators. We can imagine that not only the traditional structures of the schools but also the differing ideas about and experiences with curriculum, instruction, and learning held by everyone involved in these conversations influenced the STEM education ideas the TrMS teachers selected and retained. Similarly, the PD faculty came together at least twice per year over 3 years to continually refine and co-construct their understandings about STEM education. Each drew upon relevant experiences from their professional roles and from educational research as they collectively developed a STEM education framework for each summer institute. At RSA, teachers met weekly to jointly develop curriculum and discuss student progress and school development. Teachers and administrators received feedback from the community of STEM professionals, parents, and district administrators, which also informed their conversations and subsequent sensemaking.

As shown in Table  3 , our findings show the majority of educators in this study shared some common ideas about what is important for STEM education. However, identifying attributes and realizing these in practice are very different. For example, the interdisciplinary or integrated curriculum was the most identified theme across all concept maps. However, this may not be easily accomplished at many middle and high schools in the USA, as disciplinary skills and knowledge are often siloed, pacing guides determine time devoted to a given concept, and students move to different teachers in different groups. Opportunities to set up and engage in long-term STEM-related projects are constrained by these institutionalized practices as well as by space and equipment. Addressing this commonly identified attribute of STEM education will require tremendous creativity and resources.

Our analysis revealed other attributes that only a few included. The overall low representation of STEM education as an opportunity for all students is troubling. It may be that this was a concept educators considered but held distinct from STEM education. However, it has been apparent in education that when equity is not explicitly named and addressed, it is overlooked; Rodriguez ( 1997 ) termed this “the dangerous discourse of invisibility.” The inclusion of all students in STEM learning was emphasized in each of the contexts in this study yet failed to be retained as a salient attribute. The development of a STEM-literate citizenry and increased opportunities for all students to pursue STEM-related professions will require educators to explicitly address how students are included in or excluded from meaningful STEM learning.

Our data suggest that professional roles and contexts influence the vision educators develop about STEM education. These results raise questions about the coherence of this innovation when people in the same school or district make sense of it in such different ways. Given the variety of institutionalized practices and contexts across schools, we are not convinced that a single worldwide definition of STEM education is critical. What we do see as essential is that those working in the same system, be it a department, school, or district, explore the common elements that are being attributed to STEM education and co-construct a vision that provides opportunities for all their students to attain STEM-related goals. Visioning, however, is insufficient, as what is envisioned and what is implemented are often very different. Educators must push on the status quo in areas of instruction, curriculum, learning opportunities, assessment, and school structures. Sensemaking as a collaborative, reflective, and iterative process can surface the differences and commonalities in people’s understandings to better ensure consistency in students’ learning opportunities across classrooms.

We propose that collective sensemaking through professional dialog be an explicit and ongoing activity when planning for and implementing STEM education. Supporting dialog among stakeholders from different contexts and professional roles is critical in order to ensure that diverse perspectives about the attributes for STEM teaching, learning, and curricula can be raised and discussed. For example, community members and policymakers may take a more global perspective focused on economic and societal implications. STEM and non-STEM teachers may focus on different aspects of the learning experience. Administrators are positioned to make sense of how individual teachers’ efforts contribute to student opportunities.

While it has been well established that professional development experiences, school vision statements, or readings about an innovation do not directly translate into the classroom and school practices (Penuel et al. 2008 ), explicitly identifying the ideas educators are and are not selecting and retaining can inform professional learning activities at local and larger scales. Further research is needed to understand more specifically what ideas educators notice, select, and retain about STEM education and how to support educators’ construction of plausible stories that promote a consistent vision of STEM education across a system.

All names are pseudonyms

Achieve, I (2013). Next generation science standards . Washington, D.C.: Achieve, Inc.

Google Scholar  

Adesope, OO, & Nesbit, J (2009). A systematic review of research on collaborative learning with concept maps. In PL Torres, RC Marriott (Eds.), Handbook of research on collaborative learning using concept mapping , (pp. 238–255). Hershey: IGI Global.

Allen, CD, & Penuel, WR. (2015). Studying teachers’ sensemkaing to investigate teachers’ responses to professional development focused on new standards. Journal of Teacher Education , 66 (2), 136–149.

Article   Google Scholar  

Besterfield-Sacre, M, Gerchak, J, Lyons, M, Shuman, LJ, Wolfe, H. (2004). Scoring concept maps: an integrated rubric for assessing engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education , 93 (2), 105–115.

Bevan, B, Gutwill, JP, Petrich, M, Wilkinson, K. (2014). Learning through STEM-rich tinkering: findings from a jointly negotiated research project taken up in practice. Science Education , 99 (1), 98–120.

Breiner, JM, Harkness, SS, Johnson, CC, Koehler, CM. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics , 112 (1), 3–11.

Bruner, JS (1990). Acts of meaning . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Buck Institute. (2018). What is project-based learning (PBL)? Retrieved 16 March 2014, from http://www.bie.org/about/what_pbl

Bybee, RW. (2010). Advancing STEM education: a 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher , 70 (1), 30–35.

Bybee, RW (2013). The case for STEM education: challenges and opportunities . Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

Coburn, CE. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: how teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis , 23 (2), 145–170.

Davis, KS. (2003). “Change is hard”: what science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education , 87 (1), 3–30.

Dervin, B (1992). From the mind’s eye of the user: the sense-making qualitative-quantitative methodology. In JD Glazier, RP Powell (Eds.), Qualitative research in information management , (pp. 61–84). Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, Inc..

Fishman, BJ, & Krajcik, J. (2003). What does it mean to create sustainable science curriculum innovations? A commentary. Science Education , 87 (4), 564–573.

Gonzalez, HB, & Kuenzi, JJ (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: a primer . Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

Greene, BA, Lubin, IA, Slater, JL, Walden, SE. (2013). Mapping changes in science teachers’ content knowledge: concept maps and authentic professional development. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 22 (3), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9393-9 .

ICASE (2013). The Kuching Declaration. In Final proceeding of the World Conference on Science and Technology Education (WorldSTE2013) . Kuching: Available online at: http://www.icaseonline.net/ICASE%20Kuching%20Declaration_Final.pdf . Accessed 11 Oct 2017.

Kelley, TR, & Knowles, JG. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education , 3 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z .

Kloser, M. (2014). Identifying a core set of science teaching practices: a Delphi expert panel approach. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 51 (9), 1185–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21171 .

Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: background, federal policy, and legislative action. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/crsdocs/35/?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fcrsdocs%2F35&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages . Accessed 11 Oct 2017.

LaForce, M, Noble, E, King, H, Holt, S, Century, J (2014). The 8 elements of inclusive STEM high schools . Chicago: Outlier Research & Evaluation, CEMSE|The University of Chicago.

Lamberg, T, & Trzynadlowski, N. (2015). How STEM academy teachers conceptualize and implement STEM education. Journal of Research in STEM Education , 1 (1), 45–58.

Lampert, M, & Graziani, F. (2009). Instructional activities as a tool for teachers’ and teacher educators’ learning. The Elementary School Journal , 109 (5), 491–509.

Lesseig, K, Nelson, TH, Slavit, D, Seidel, R. (2016). Supporting middle school teachers’ implementation of STEM design challenges. School Science and Mathematics , 116 (4), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12172 .

Lesseig, K, Slavit, D, Nelson, TH. (2017). Jumping on the STEM bandwagon: how middle grades students and teachers can benefit from STEM experiences. Middle School Journal , 48 (3), 15–24.

Linderman, A, Baker, J, Bosacker, SC. (2011). Surfacing and transferring expert knowledge: the sense-making interview. Human Resource Development International , 14 (3), 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2011.585071 .

Markham, KM, Mintzes, JJ, Jones, MG. (1994). The concept map as a research and evaluation tool: further evidence of validity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 31 (1), 91–101.

National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: status, prospects, and an agenda for research . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Governors Association (2010). Common core state standards initiative, mathematics . Washington DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers.

National Research Council (2011a). Successful K-12 STEM education: identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2011b). Successful K-12 STEM education: a workshop summary . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas . Washington, D. C: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2013). Monitoring progress toward successful K-12 STEM education: a nation advancing? Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Science Board (2015). Revisiting the STEM workforce: a companion to science and engineering indicators 2014 (pp. 46) . Arlington: National Science Foundation.

Newmann, F, & Associates (1996). Authentic achievement: restructuring schools for intellectual quality . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Novak, JD. (1995). Concept mapping to facilitate teaching and learning. Prospects , 25 (1), 79–86.

Novak, JD, & Cañas, AJ (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. In Technical Report IHMC CmapTools . Pensacola: Florida Institue for Human and Machine Cognition.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2013). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved 4 June 2013 from http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework .

Patton, M. (Producer) (2013). ATE had role in naming of STEM. [blog] Retrieved from https://atecentral.net/ate20/22917/ate-had-role-in-the-naming-of-stem . Accessed 11 Oct 2017.

Penuel, W, Fishman, BJ, Gallagher, LP, Korbak, C, Lopez-Prado, B. (2008). Is alignment enough? Investigating the effects of state policies and professional development on science curriculum implementation. Science Education , 93 (4), 656–677. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20321 .

Peters-Burton, EE, Lynch, SJ, Behrend, TS, Means, BB. (2014). Inclusive STEM high school design: 10 critical components. Theory Into Practice , 53 (1), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.862125 .

Ring, EA, Dare, EA, Crotty, EA, Roehrig, GH. (2017). The evolution of teacher conceptions of STEM education throughout an intensive professional development experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education , 28 (5), 444–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1356671 .

Rodriguez, AJ. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: a critique of the National Research Council’s national science education standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 34 (1), 19–37.

Roehrig, GH, Moore, TJ, Wang, HH, Park, MS. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics , 112 (1), 31–44.

Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher , 68 (4), 20–26.

Slavit, D, Nelson, TH, Lesseig, K. (2016). The teachers’ role in developing, opening, and nurturing an inclusive STEM-focused school. International Journal of STEM Education , 3 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0040-5 .

Southwest Regional STEM Network (2009). Southwest Pennsylvania STEM network long range plan (2009–2018): plan summary , (p. 15). Pittsburgh: Author.

Spillane, JP. (2001). Cognition and policy implementation: district policymakers and the reform of mathematics education. Cognition and Instruction , 18 (2), 141–179.

Spillane, JP, Reiser, BJ, Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research , 72 (3), 387–431.

STEM Education Coalition (2014). Statement of core policy principles. Retrieved from http://www.stemedcoalition.org . Accessed 11 Oct 2017.

Wang, HH, Moore, TJ, Roehrig, GH, Park, MS. (2011). STEM integration: teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education , 1 (2), 1–13.

Weick, KE (1995). Sensemaking in organizations . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Weick, KE, Sutcliffe, KM, Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science , 16 (4), 409–421.

Whitcomb, J, Borko, H, Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: promising professional development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education , 60 (3), 207–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109337280 .

Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics , 112 (1), 12–19.

Download references

Availability of data and materials

Data are summarized in tables in the article; raw data, such as interview transcripts and participants’ concept maps, can be made available. Please contact the author for data requests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Washington State University, 14204 NE Salmon Creek Avenue, Vancouver, WA, 98686-9600, USA

Tamara D. Holmlund, Kristin Lesseig & David Slavit

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All three authors contributed to the data collection, analysis, and writing. Each author’s participation in the various contexts is described in the text. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tamara D. Holmlund .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This research was reviewed and approved by the WSU Institutional Review Board, approval #13811.

Consent for publication

All participants signed an approved consent form; all the names of people and places in our manuscript are pseudonyms.

Competing interests

Not applicable

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Holmlund, T.D., Lesseig, K. & Slavit, D. Making sense of “STEM education” in K-12 contexts. IJ STEM Ed 5 , 32 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0127-2

Download citation

Received : 03 November 2017

Accepted : 08 August 2018

Published : 24 August 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0127-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• STEM Education
• Traditional Middle School (TrMS)
• Concept Mapping
• Sensemaking
• Real-world Problem Solving

• myState on Mississippi State University
• Directory on Mississippi State University
• Calendars on Mississippi State University
• A-Z Index on Mississippi State University
• Maps on Mississippi State University
• News on Mississippi State University
• Contact on Mississippi State University

MSU staff members graduate from College Business Management Institute

Contact: Bethany Shipp

STARKVILLE, Miss.— Two Mississippi State staff members are recent graduates of the College Business Management Institute, a premier national professional development program providing business officers and administrators with the knowledge and skills needed to excel in higher education business administration.

Tonya Calmes, business coordinator for the Department of Psychology housed in the College of Arts and Sciences, and Chekila Young, business coordinator for the Department of Teacher Education and Leadership in the College of Education, completed the program during the institute’s annual meeting in Lexington, Kentucky, July 21-26.

Co-sponsored by the Southern Association of College and University Business Officers and the University of Kentucky, CBMI offers an intensive course of study in business and financial management for administrators representing higher education institutions across the country.

“My participation in the CBMI will enhance my professional career at MSU by improving my skills and knowledge to make effective decisions. It was a great experience to meet and network with many individuals with different diverse backgrounds,” said Calmes.

“CBMI is a great program to participate in,” said Young. “It was very informative and gave us insights into the current issues facing higher education. It was also a great networking opportunity in a very diverse population. I highly encourage any administrator in higher education to attend in the future.”

This year, more than 70 courses ranging from entry-level to advanced were taught by distinguished faculty, giving participants an overview of current issues and procedures applicable to colleges and universities.

Individuals participate in one week of instruction every summer for three years to complete the program and may earn up to 28 hours of continuing professional credits each summer. Graduates are honored during a ceremony and receive a certificate of completion.

MSU’s College of Education is home to five academic departments, a division of education, one research unit and numerous service units. Learn more at  https://www.educ.msstate.edu/ .

MSU’s College of Arts and Sciences is the largest academic college at the land-grant university and is home to 27-degree programs, nine doctoral and 14 master’s programs in 14 departments. Learn more at www.cas.msstate.edu .

Mississippi State University is taking care of what matters. Learn more at www.msstate.edu .

Wednesday, July 31, 2024 - 3:57 pm

• Faculty & Staff News
• College of Arts & Sciences
• College of Education

You may also be interested in…

Electric vehicle charger donation powers up msu cavs.

July 17, 2024

MSU Supplemental Instruction gains reaccreditation, helps students succeed in challenging courses

July 22, 2024

MSU's Blank in The Conversation: What the Supreme Court’s ruling in SEC v. Jarkesy means for investors

July 10, 2024

• Find Mississippi State University on Facebook
• Find Mississippi State University on Instagram
• Find Mississippi State University on LinkedIn
• Find Mississippi State University on Pinterest
• Find Mississippi State University on Twitter
• Find Mississippi State University on YouTube