Moving Forward with STEAM Education Research

  • Xun Ge
  • Dirk Ifenthaler
  • J. Michael Spector
Part of the Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations book series (ECTII)


In this concluding chapter, the importance of STEAM education in supporting the 21st century skills is again emphasized. We have analyzed three themes that emerged from the chapters included in this book: (1) different perspectives towards STEAM education and the role of Arts, (2) the role of technology in STEAM education, and (3) the pedagogy and curricula development in STEAM education. Based on our literature review and the scholarly work contributed by the authors of this book, we have identified a number of areas that need to be focused on as we move forward with research, development and practice in the broad area of STEAM education. The chapter concludes with a discussion of future directions for research and practice.


Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics (STEAM) education 21st century skills The Arts The role of technology Competence-based learning Well-rounded individuals Reconceptualizing curricula STEAM pedagogy 


  1. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  3. Camilla, F., & Cooper, M. (2014). An introduction and guide to evaluation of visualization techniques through user studies. In W. Huang (Ed.), Handbook of human centric visualization (pp. 285–313). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics [Technical Report No. 403]. Cambridge: BBN Laboratories.Google Scholar
  5. Fitzpatrick, K. R. (2006). The effect of instrumental music participation and socioeconomic status on Ohio fourth-, sixth-, and ninth-grade proficiency test performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(1), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Haley, J. A. (2001). The relationship between instrumental music instruction and academic achievement in fourth grade students. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT 3026550).Google Scholar
  7. Ifenthaler, D. (2014). Toward automated computer-based visualization and assessment of team-based performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 651–665. doi:10.1037/a0035505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. M. (2011). A longitudinal perspective on inductive reasoning tasks. Illuminating the probability of change. Learning and Instruction, 21(4), 538–549. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. M. (2013). Model-based reasoning. Computers & Education, 64, 131–142. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ifenthaler, D., Pirnay-Dummer, P., & Seel, N. M. (Eds.). (2010). Computer-based diagnostics and systematic analysis of knowledge. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson, C. M., & Memmott, J. E. (2006). Examination of relationships between participation in school music programs of differing quality and standardized test results. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54(4), 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jonassen, D. H., & Carr, C. S. (2000). Mindtools: Affording multiple knowledge representations for learning. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools: No more walls (Vol. 2, pp. 165–196). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Merrill, M. D. (2013). First principles of instruction: Identifying and designing effective, efficient and engaging instruction. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Rinne, L., Gregory, E., Yarmolinskaya, J., & Hardiman, M. (2011). Why arts integration improves long-term retention of content. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(2), 89–96. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2011.01114.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sousa, D. A., & Pilecki, T. (2013). From STEM to STEAM: Using brain-compatible strategies to integrate the arts. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  16. Toyoshima, K., Fukui, H., & Kuda, K. (2011). Piano playing reduces stress more than other creative art activities. International Journal of Music Education, 29, 257–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OklahomaNormanUSA
  2. 2.University of MannheimMannheimGermany
  3. 3.Deakin UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  4. 4.University of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations