Scholarlink

<p>This reflective essay examines the purposes and risks of STEM education through the lens of Derek Hodson’s call for a science–technology–society (STS) orientation. Drawing on classroom observations in Singapore and other Asian contexts, the paper critiques the contemporary makerspace movement and its embrace of design thinking as a vehicle for interdisciplinary learning. While makerspaces can motivate students and be potential sites for STS, they often succumb to “keychain syndrome,” superficial fabrication tasks, and technological determinism that reinforce neoliberal and techno-solutionist ideologies.&#xa0;Engaging R. S. Peters’ and Hannah Arendt’s philosophical concerns, the essay argues that educators must grapple with enduring questions of educational purpose. Rather than treating STEM as neutral or purely instrumental, teachers and researchers are urged to cultivate critical inquiry, intellectual humility, and moral imagination while maintaining rigorous attention to scientific and mathematical understanding. Education, understood as preparation for a life worth living, remains a venture marked by uncertainty and risk; it demands that educators model the wisdom and long-term vision they hope to inspire in students.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

STEM Education to What Ends? The Risks of an Education Worth Having

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月28日

查看全文
  • Michael Tan

摘要

This reflective essay examines the purposes and risks of STEM education through the lens of Derek Hodson’s call for a science–technology–society (STS) orientation. Drawing on classroom observations in Singapore and other Asian contexts, the paper critiques the contemporary makerspace movement and its embrace of design thinking as a vehicle for interdisciplinary learning. While makerspaces can motivate students and be potential sites for STS, they often succumb to “keychain syndrome,” superficial fabrication tasks, and technological determinism that reinforce neoliberal and techno-solutionist ideologies. Engaging R. S. Peters’ and Hannah Arendt’s philosophical concerns, the essay argues that educators must grapple with enduring questions of educational purpose. Rather than treating STEM as neutral or purely instrumental, teachers and researchers are urged to cultivate critical inquiry, intellectual humility, and moral imagination while maintaining rigorous attention to scientific and mathematical understanding. Education, understood as preparation for a life worth living, remains a venture marked by uncertainty and risk; it demands that educators model the wisdom and long-term vision they hope to inspire in students.