Learning Together: A Collaborative Autoethnographic Exploration of STEAM (STEM + the Arts) Education

TLDR

STEAM education is increasingly popular for fostering creativity and broadening STEM interest, yet some art educators criticize its instrumental framing that prioritizes STEM performance over artistic values. This study proposes an expanded view of STEAM that aligns engineering education with arts pedagogical commitments and invites further research to broaden the conversation about its diverse contributions. The authors conduct a collaborative autoethnographic study grounded in Maxine Greene’s philosophy, combining perspectives from environmental engineering and art education to explore STEAM’s pedagogical implications. Their dialogue shows that STEAM offers opportunities for students and educators to connect materials, design, society, and the environment while critically examining disciplinary identities, thereby complementing and challenging prevailing growth‑centric conceptions of the movement.

Abstract

Abstract Background There is a growing interest in STEAM (STEM + the Arts) education as a means to enhance the creativity of STEM students and broaden interest in STEM fields. Many art educators, however, object to the instrumental justification for study in the arts as a way to improve student performance in other areas. Purpose Drawing on the first two authors' engagement in an interdisciplinary design studio, this study develops an expanded view of how STEAM might enrich engineering education in ways that more closely align with the pedagogical commitments of the arts. Design/Method This article is written as a collaborative autoethnography between the first two authors, educators in environmental engineering and art education, respectively. The study is grounded in the educational philosophy of arts advocate Maxine Greene, who views learning as an active, collaborative search for meaning, “wide‐awakeness,” and social change. Results Our dialogue reveals the potential for STEAM to provide students and educators with opportunities to explore personally relevant connections between materials, design, society, and the natural environment and to critically engage with implicit and explicit facets of disciplinary identity. Conclusions This view of STEAM simultaneously complements and challenges current conceptions of this emerging educational movement that, almost without exception, are underpinned by calls for competitive economic growth and technological development. We hope future research will build on our perspectives to continue a conversation about STEAM that considers the diverse contributions of, and mutual benefits to, all parties involved.