Going From STEM to STEAM: The Arts Have a Role in America’s Future, Too

Joseph Piro, an associate professor of curriculum and instruction in the school of education at Long Island University, conducted research suggesting that contrary to popular belief, art curriculum complements instruction in science and technology. He reviewed the influence music training has on the development of literacy skills. He looked specifically at vocabulary and verbal sequencing:


The outcome of one of [his] studies indicated that the fusion of scaffolded music instruction with a balanced literacy program from kindergarten to 2nd grade resulted in superior cognitive performance in those students who were musically trained, when compared with those students who were not (“Education Week”, 2010, p.29).

He also notes that musical training has positive effects on spatial sequencing, verbal ability, and nonverbal reasoning. In an effort to curtail us-against-them arguments and achieve a more synergistic balance between the arts and sciences he examined additional studies in his article. Involvement in visual arts has been shown to “intensify students’ observational powers and analytic prowess…and result in better questioning skills and an understanding that problems can have multiple answers” (p.28).

He feels that a more synergistic approach to the long term debate between art and science, and now art and technology, will better address the concerns that many people have about educational curriculum. Much of the support the Obama administration as well as previous administrations are offering for science and technology is based on the belief that the “United States is becoming less competitive and secure, that we are losing our global-leader status in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields” (p.28). Piro notes the large ratio of the nation’s work force that is involved in the arts. This population generates $70 billion in income annually. Including arts within the STEM focus not only supports this industry, but reaches many types of learners who have the potential to assist in the development of the arts as well as the sciences. He argues that a more comprehensive education can only assist with the goals current and past administrations have outlined. STEM should be changed to STEAM to include the arts.

I appreciate Piro’s position. Either or arguments tend to alienate both polarities of an issue and block creative comprehensive solutions. Therefore making an effort to bridge this gap in the stalemate between art and technology is important. The two fields can be of assistance to one another. I would go further than Piro, however, and state that art education need not be teleological in order to be of value. There are learners that need and can benefit from it, therefore it is of value. Furthermore, art need not be taught for the purpose of training minds to produce military, commercial, or industrial goods in order to be of value. Creativity, aesthetic sensibilities and appreciation, higher spatial reasoning skills, sensory awareness, and many other benefits of art have cultural value that are not easily measured. Few would argue, though, that these are skills that they would not want their children to have.

Piro, J. (2010, March 10th). Going From STEM to STEAM: The Arts Have a Role in America’s Future, Too. Education Week: American Education’s Newspaper of Record, 29 (24), 28-30.