STEM to STREAM idea has merits

THE teaching of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) is now a global education agenda in many countries. In a world economy driven by technology and innovation, any lacking in STEM talent is viewed as a detriment. This has become even more urgent as student interest in science has taken a dive.

At home, the target to have at least 60% of students pursuing STEM has not materialised. Recent data even suggests below 20%. But we are not alone. Many blame such phenomenon on the boring way science subjects are taught. Unless the issue is addressed effectively, future talents in science may soon dry up.

Responding to the call, many initiatives to make STEM teaching more interesting have emerged. Grouped under the concept of Inquiry Based Science Education (IBSE), different countries have given different brands to such participative learning idea. In France, it is La Man La Pat or Hands on the Dough, and in China it is Hands and Brains.

Here at home, we have been using the French model of IBSE. Over the years, the Academy of Science Malaysia has organised training stints for teachers and conducted pilot studies together with the Education Ministry. But success has been limited, as interest in STEM among students remains low.

This limited success may have been due to the flip-flop nature of our education policy. We change the emphasis much too often. An idea like IBSE cannot be a shortterm measure. The commitment has to be long term if we are to make it work.

Now, Education Minister Dr Maszlee Malik has introduced another idea, STREAM, to replace STEM. I remember a colleague mooting a similar proposal to move STEM beyond the sciences. He spoke about bringing in the human dimension into STEM. Now that the Education Minister himself has thrown his support behind the idea, the chance for change may be further enhanced. We will wait and see.

I see the minister as a lateral thinker. I have noticed that since assuming office, he always likes to challenge the norms. According to Edward de Bono, such character is a mark of lateral thinking.

Judging from the reported feedback from various educationists, many seem uneasy with Maszlee’s approach. Give him time. For all you know, he may be planting the real seeds of education transformation in the country – a transformation that, as many will agree, we desperately need and crave for.

Looking closely at the STREAM idea, there are merits which may not be obvious to some.

Understanding the true agenda of education would make us appreciate the idea.

Why do we need to invest in education? I am sure many share the view that education is all about producing productive citizens for the nation and the world.

These are citizens who can effectively contribute not only to make the nation peaceful and progressive, but also to play a role on the world stage.

There is no denying that the nation faces many challenges, which to some extent also mirror the problems of the world. Admittedly, science can be a powerful asset to tackle all such problems. But increasingly, it alone cannot deliver the lasting solutions that we all seek.

Very few would dispute the fact that sustainable development encapsulates literally all the major problems of the world. These are problems of depleting resources, escalating inequity as well as the degradation of the environment.

As a nation, we share the same concerns. How do we continue to sustain the country, making healthy socio-economic progress but not at the expense of the needs of the future generation?

The global blueprint for this is the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). If we study all the 17 goals, the solutions lie not just in STEM but rather in a multi-disciplinary execution strategy.

Take climate change, for example. There is no way the world can tackle the problem only with STEM knowledge. Inculcating our future citizens with the skills encapsulated under STREAM, which incorporate the arts and reading, is a better bet in making a success of the SDGs.