In several of my presentations on STEM Learning I share how it seems some grade level planning sessions approach STEM.

X   Science – “We have science twice a week now for 30-45 minutes.” “Check”

X   Technology – “We go to the computer lab once a week for 30-45 minutes and run apps on the school iPads in class occasionally.” “Check”

X    Engineering – “We’ll fold paper airplanes the last 30 minutes on Friday, fly them, then refold them to see if we can get them to fly further.” “Check”

X    Math – “We do math every day!” “Check”

“LOOK! We’re a STEM school (or grade level) and we didn’t even know it!”

There are several (at least) major issues with the above scenario, but this post will deal mostly with the technology piece. I’ll just say it right up front. When I visit schools, attend trainings or presentations that purport to be about “model,” or even just “pretty good,” STEM learning programs, what I mostly see are what I’ll call “SEM” learning programs. I’m not saying there are no good STEM programs, just what I mostly see is “SEM.”

Why no “T”? The technology use/integration I observe is usually poor … often just an afterthought or so we can say it was there, rarely used powerfully, rarely used as a collaborative/connecting piece, rarely used beyond fairly mundane, “instead of a pencil,” …  “to look something up” kinds of ways. There is some interest now in using computers to “code” or program using computers, and that is definitely a good thing, but not if its just during “The Hour of Code“. One issue is some STEM programs teach that anything from a rock, stick, pencil or paper cup, if used thoughtfully is technology (which is true) … but then pretty much anything anyone ever does would involve technology. But I don’t think that “T” in STEM was included with that in mind. 

Blogging and video conferencing and making a web page or podcasting or producing a video or programming and any other way someone might use technology are OK. But if they are not being used consistently to produce, analyze, problem solve and share, its a bit like dieting to lose weight a few days a year.

I see time and again students involved in inquiry and other lessons that involve data collection and drawing conclusions and more, but that’s where it ends. Often these experiences are engaging and motivating and kids are excited and we end right there. We have the students right where we want them, where they are motivated and have reason to analyze and learn more about what happened … and to get there they should be discussing and arguing and deciding (maybe agonizing over) how and what to post that their data and observations showed AND their conclusions.

Now, how best to share that? (another creative problem to solve). It involves that “making” piece online.” What are we going to “make” to publish our learning, and how can we make that piece engaging as well? Something we can create that will make others want to learn what we learned and perhaps converse and even collaborate about? The process of sharing learning is often where misconceptions or errors in trials, basic understanding or data collection arise and can be dealt with.

I’ve found that this is when students relive what they did and get excited about it again (even though this is hard work). Partly through the give and take and creative release from designing and writing a program or producing a video/podcast/blog post/captioned photo or whatever, and since they have shared … now they have the opportunity to discuss and perhaps collaborate (if that wasn’t already part of the learning) with others … perhaps experts they or you have found to share their work with, or just others that come across their posted results, … there are so many possibilities here that utilize that “T” in powerful ways that stress problem solving, communication and collaboration … and too often this vital learning is left behind. Perhaps because it’s value is not understood or valued and because the perception is that, “We don’t have time.”.

I’m not saying you to go this deep EVERY TIME, but MORE of the time for sure. It is how technology actually becomes a powerful learning tool.

I emphasize all the time how all those publishing and analyzing pieces are what make a solid STEM program the best ELA and math learning your students will do. But not if we leave it behind. It’s hard work on the students’ and teacher’s (facilitator’s) part … and it is time consuming … and we have that incessant “tick, tick, tick” that time is going by and I have to get through this and move on! Maybe just to get done, or worse so we will be ready for testing. But this is the “messy” learning our students deserve. Publishing to the world is another reason to be accurate, clear, concise, creative and much more.

What are your thoughts?

Learning is messy!