Thread: STEM vs. STEAM
View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-09-2016, 00:47
cadandcookies's Avatar
cadandcookies cadandcookies is offline
Director of Programs, GOFIRST
AKA: Nick Aarestad
FTC #9205 (The Iron Maidens)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Minnesnowta
Posts: 1,511
cadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond reputecadandcookies has a reputation beyond repute
Re: STEM vs. STEAM

I think there is a place for both.

Mohammed above me defines the art in STEAM as fine arts, but I would argue that in many cases art is much broader, and more applicable than that., especially when we are including art with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. If I put in "define:art" on google, I get the following definition first:
Quote:
the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
For me, the key is that first part: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination-- this is, fundamentally, what science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields are. The difference is in that last part-- producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. Art is the application of the same things we value in STEM, just towards a different end. On a philosophical level, I see no issues in including art.

All this being said, I think that too often "STEAM" is trotted out when someone either wants a slice of the STEM financial pie or to pretend that a deficit in arts or STEM fields is somehow made up by an excess of the other.

I also think that in FIRST we're in a unique position to create things that can be appreciated both for their technical and performance aspects, but also for their aesthetics and emotional resonance. At champs last year, who wasn't on the edge of their seat and then cheering when 330 fell and got back up, not once, but twice? There is huge power in seeing a robot not only perform well, but also look pretty (at least from a distance, I never got a chance to look at it up close) and there is resonance in that getting back up-- we all fall, we all fail, and I think a robot doing the same can generate a similar reaction to watching an athlete do something similar in an athletic event.

At the end of the day, I can appreciate both STEM and STEAM in their appropriate contexts. What I can't stand is using one or the other to mask issues stemming from a deficit of either.
__________________

Never assume the motives of others are, to them, less noble than yours are to you. - John Perry Barlow
tumblr | twitter
'Snow Problem CAD Files: 2015 2016
MN FTC Field Manager, FTA, CSA, Emcee
FLL Maybe NXT Year (09-10) -> FRC 2220 (11-14) -> FTC 9205(14-?)/FRC 2667 (15-16)
VEXU UMN (2015-??)
Volunteer since 2011
2013 RCA Winner (North Star Regional) (2220)
2016 Connect Award Winner (North Super Regional and World Championship) (9205)
Reply With Quote