# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

August  2021, 1(3): 141-156. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021011

## Centricities of STEM curriculum frameworks: Variations of the S-T-E-M Quartet

 National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; aikling.tan@nie.edu.sg (A.L.T.); yannshiou.ong@nie.edu.sg (Y.S.O.); banheng.choy@nie.edu.sg (B.H.C.)

* Correspondence: tangwee.teo@nie.edu.sg; Tel: +65-790-3830

Received  April 2021 Revised  June 2021 Published  August 2021

This commentary is an extension to the integrated S-T-E-M Quartet Instructional Framework that has been used to guide the design, implementation and evaluation of integrated STEM curriculum. In our discussion of the S-T-E-M Quartet, we have argued for the centrality of complex, persistent and extended problems to reflect the authenticity of real-world issues and hence, the need for integrated, as opposed to monodisciplinary, STEM education. Building upon this earlier work, we propose two additional variationsjsolution-centric and user-centric approachesjto the provision of integrated STEM curricular experiences to afford more opportunities that address the meta-knowledge and humanistic knowledge developments in 21st century learning. These variations to the S-T-E-M Quartet aims to expand the scope and utility of the framework in creating curriculum experiences for diverse profiles of learners, varied contextual conditions, and broad STEM education goals. Collectively, these three approachesjproblem-centric, solution-centric, and user-centricjcan afford more holistic outcomes of STEM education.

Citation: Tang Wee Teo, Aik Ling Tan, Yann Shiou Ong, Ban Heng Choy. Centricities of STEM curriculum frameworks: Variations of the S-T-E-M Quartet. STEM Education, 2021, 1 (3) : 141-156. doi: 10.3934/steme.2021011
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
]">Figure 1.  Problem-centric integrated STEM instructional framework [taken from 28]
Solution-centric integrated STEM instructional framework
User-centric integrated STEM instructional framework
Summary of STEM curriculum frameworks
 Entry No. Articles on STEM Curriculum Frameworks Brief Description of Integration Centrality of STEM F#1 Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., Boeve-de Pauw, J., et al. [29] Integration of STEM content, problem-centered learning, inquiry-based learning, design-based learning, cooperative learning Not mentioned F#2 Wells, J. G. [32] PIRPOSAL Model based on engineering design PIRPOSAL is the acronym for: ●   Problem Identification ●   Ideation ●   Research ●   Potential solutions ●   Optimization ●   Solution evaluation ●   Alterations ●   Learned outcomes Questioning - to initiate the engineering design processes, promoting convergent and divergent thinking F#3 English, L. D., King, D., & Smeed, J. [9] Framework based on engineering design STEM disciplinary knowledge from each STEM domain F#4 Asunda, P. A., & Mativo, J. [1] Problem-based learning, pragmatism, and four theoretical constructs (systems thinking, situated learning theory, constructivism, and goal orientation theory) that blend together to accentuate Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) Problem-based learning F#5 Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. [15] Connections between situated learning, engineering design, scientific inquiry, technological literacy and mathematical thinking Context F#6 Glancy, A. W., & Moore, T. J. [11] STEM Translation Model that proposes engaging the unique ways of thinking within each discipline and applying it to solve problems in another disciplines Disciplinary thinking F#7 Gale, J., Alemdar, M., Lingle, J., & Newton, S. [10] Innovation Implementation Framework identifies the critical component of innovation and uses it for evaluating innovation implementation Structural and interactional innovation components F#8 Tan, Teo, Choy, & Ong [28] S-T-E-M Quartet Instructional Framework on vertical and horizontal integrations within and across disciplines to solve authentic problems Complex, extended and persistent problems
 Entry No. Articles on STEM Curriculum Frameworks Brief Description of Integration Centrality of STEM F#1 Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., Boeve-de Pauw, J., et al. [29] Integration of STEM content, problem-centered learning, inquiry-based learning, design-based learning, cooperative learning Not mentioned F#2 Wells, J. G. [32] PIRPOSAL Model based on engineering design PIRPOSAL is the acronym for: ●   Problem Identification ●   Ideation ●   Research ●   Potential solutions ●   Optimization ●   Solution evaluation ●   Alterations ●   Learned outcomes Questioning - to initiate the engineering design processes, promoting convergent and divergent thinking F#3 English, L. D., King, D., & Smeed, J. [9] Framework based on engineering design STEM disciplinary knowledge from each STEM domain F#4 Asunda, P. A., & Mativo, J. [1] Problem-based learning, pragmatism, and four theoretical constructs (systems thinking, situated learning theory, constructivism, and goal orientation theory) that blend together to accentuate Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) Problem-based learning F#5 Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. [15] Connections between situated learning, engineering design, scientific inquiry, technological literacy and mathematical thinking Context F#6 Glancy, A. W., & Moore, T. J. [11] STEM Translation Model that proposes engaging the unique ways of thinking within each discipline and applying it to solve problems in another disciplines Disciplinary thinking F#7 Gale, J., Alemdar, M., Lingle, J., & Newton, S. [10] Innovation Implementation Framework identifies the critical component of innovation and uses it for evaluating innovation implementation Structural and interactional innovation components F#8 Tan, Teo, Choy, & Ong [28] S-T-E-M Quartet Instructional Framework on vertical and horizontal integrations within and across disciplines to solve authentic problems Complex, extended and persistent problems
Comparison of the problem-, solution- and user-centric S-T-E-M Quartets
 Problem-Centric Solution-Centric User-Centric Focus Complex, extended, and persistent problem An existing solution to (part) of a complex, extended, and persistent problem The existing and potential users of the outputs of the STEM solution Types of knowledge prioritised in 21CC framework Meta Knowledge: Students may think creatively on different ways to solve the problem collaboratively Foundational Knowledge: The solution may be well-defined and core content knowledge and cross-disciplinary knowledge are pre-identified (e.g., use of technology as a requirement). Humanistic Knowledge: Development of empathy in designers can be an outcome of the process. Beneficiaries of the outcomes and outputs of engaging each model The learners get to explore alternatives and develop a range of solutions for people to choose from. The process is systematic, and resources may be sourced and provided to systematically test the feasibility of the idea. The product is based on what users want, need or can use. They are not forced to change their behaviour and expectations to accommodate the product. Their needs are better met. Limitations of the outcomes/outputs of engaging the various models Wide range of solutions may be derived that may not be pragmatic unless tested and evaluated The solution or approach may become too well-defined and limits creativity and innovation. Individual needs are diverse hence, the product may not meet the needs of a large group of beneficiaries.
 Problem-Centric Solution-Centric User-Centric Focus Complex, extended, and persistent problem An existing solution to (part) of a complex, extended, and persistent problem The existing and potential users of the outputs of the STEM solution Types of knowledge prioritised in 21CC framework Meta Knowledge: Students may think creatively on different ways to solve the problem collaboratively Foundational Knowledge: The solution may be well-defined and core content knowledge and cross-disciplinary knowledge are pre-identified (e.g., use of technology as a requirement). Humanistic Knowledge: Development of empathy in designers can be an outcome of the process. Beneficiaries of the outcomes and outputs of engaging each model The learners get to explore alternatives and develop a range of solutions for people to choose from. The process is systematic, and resources may be sourced and provided to systematically test the feasibility of the idea. The product is based on what users want, need or can use. They are not forced to change their behaviour and expectations to accommodate the product. Their needs are better met. Limitations of the outcomes/outputs of engaging the various models Wide range of solutions may be derived that may not be pragmatic unless tested and evaluated The solution or approach may become too well-defined and limits creativity and innovation. Individual needs are diverse hence, the product may not meet the needs of a large group of beneficiaries.
 [1] Manel Hmimida, Rushed Kanawati. Community detection in multiplex networks: A seed-centric approach. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2015, 10 (1) : 71-85. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2015.10.71 [2] Dieter Armbruster, Simone Göttlich, Stephan Knapp. Continuous approximation of $M_t/M_t/ 1$ distributions with application to production. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2020, 7 (2) : 243-269. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2020010 [3] Joan-Josep Climent, Juan Antonio López-Ramos. Public key protocols over the ring $E_{p}^{(m)}$. Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 2016, 10 (4) : 861-870. doi: 10.3934/amc.2016046 [4] Julio C. Rebelo, Ana L. Silva. On the Burnside problem in Diff(M). Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2007, 17 (2) : 423-439. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2007.17.423 [5] Chia-Huang Wu, Kuo-Hsiung Wang, Jau-Chuan Ke, Jyh-Bin Ke. A heuristic algorithm for the optimization of M/M/$s$ queue with multiple working vacations. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2012, 8 (1) : 1-17. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2012.8.1 [6] Olga Kharlampovich and Alexei Myasnikov. Tarski's problem about the elementary theory of free groups has a positive solution. Electronic Research Announcements, 1998, 4: 101-108. [7] Abdelaaziz Sbai, Youssef El Hadfi, Mohammed Srati, Noureddine Aboutabit. Existence of solution for Kirchhoff type problem in Orlicz-Sobolev spaces Via Leray-Schauder's nonlinear alternative. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2022, 15 (1) : 213-227. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2021015 [8] Augusto Visintin. P.D.E.s with hysteresis 30 years later. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2015, 8 (4) : 793-816. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2015.8.793 [9] Shengzhu Jin, Bong Dae Choi, Doo Seop Eom. Performance analysis of binary exponential backoff MAC protocol for cognitive radio in the IEEE 802.16e/m network. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (3) : 1483-1494. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017003 [10] Francesco Mainardi. On some properties of the Mittag-Leffler function $\mathbf{E_\alpha(-t^\alpha)}$, completely monotone for $\mathbf{t> 0}$ with $\mathbf{0<\alpha<1}$. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2014, 19 (7) : 2267-2278. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2014.19.2267 [11] Ruikuan Liu, Dongpei Zhang. Dynamic transitions for the S-K-T competition system. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021277 [12] Jun Tu, Zijiao Sun, Min Huang. Supply chain coordination considering e-tailer's promotion effort and logistics provider's service effort. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021062 [13] Dequan Yue, Wuyi Yue. Block-partitioning matrix solution of M/M/R/N queueing system with balking, reneging and server breakdowns. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2009, 5 (3) : 417-430. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2009.5.417 [14] Gregory M. Manning. Some results on the $m(4)$ problem of Erdos and Hajnal. Electronic Research Announcements, 1995, 1: 112-113. [15] Dequan Yue, Wuyi Yue, Guoxi Zhao. Analysis of an M/M/1 queue with vacations and impatience timers which depend on the server's states. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (2) : 653-666. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.653 [16] Yutaka Sakuma, Atsushi Inoie, Ken’ichi Kawanishi, Masakiyo Miyazawa. Tail asymptotics for waiting time distribution of an M/M/s queue with general impatient time. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (3) : 593-606. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.593 [17] Ikuo Arizono, Yasuhiko Takemoto. Statistical mechanics approach for steady-state analysis in M/M/s queueing system with balking. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2022, 18 (1) : 25-44. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020141 [18] Sung-Seok Ko, Jangha Kang, E-Yeon Kwon. An $(s,S)$ inventory model with level-dependent $G/M/1$-Type structure. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (2) : 609-624. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.609 [19] Cheng-Dar Liou. Note on "Cost analysis of the M/M/R machine repair problem with second optional repair: Newton-Quasi method". Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2012, 8 (3) : 727-732. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2012.8.727 [20] Kuo-Hsiung Wang, Chuen-Wen Liao, Tseng-Chang Yen. Cost analysis of the M/M/R machine repair problem with second optional repair: Newton-Quasi method. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2010, 6 (1) : 197-207. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2010.6.197

Impact Factor: