<p>Integrated STEM education (iSTEMe) is widely promoted as a key innovation for enhancing scientific and technological literacy. However, a critical examination of the literature reveals that these claims remain largely unsubstantiated. Our analysis identifies three structural weaknesses: (1) lack of consensus on its conceptualization and operationalization; (2) limited empirical evidence supporting its effectiveness compared to non-integrated, disciplinary approaches; and (3) a persistent disconnect from classroom realities. Despite these limitations, continued iSTEMe promotion appears driven more by political and policy agendas than by robust educational evidence. Consequently, we argue that, rather than a transformative innovation, iSTEMe risks becoming a <i>pedagogical chimera</i>—an idealized approach fraught with conceptual and methodological complexities that inherently exceed the practical conditions required for successful implementation. We therefore call for greater caution among policymakers and researchers, emphasizing the need for robust theoretical frameworks, stronger empirical evidence, well-grounded teacher education, and teachers’ active involvement in educational reforms.</p>