CHAPTER 5

Flourishing Effects of Integrating the Arts and Humanities in STEM Education: A Review of Past Studies and an Agenda for Future Research

Hoda Vaziri and Norman M. Bradburn

Abstract

With growing interest and emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) within society, scholars and educators have proposed the inclusion of the arts and humanities into STEM education (i.e., STEAM) with the premise that such an interdisciplinary approach to education would further enhance students’ retention, learning, and flourishing. While the literature on student retention and learning outcomes is fruitful, less attention has been paid to the flourishing effects of STEAM education. Accordingly, the purpose of this chapter is to provide a systematic review of the literature on STEAM education and flourishing outcomes (i.e., subjective and psychological well-being, character and virtue, and creativity). The authors find that the research on the topic is scarce and more research is needed to further understanding of the topic. The chapter concludes with recommendations for future research.

Key Words: STEAM, well-being, education, review, arts and humanities, STEM

With rapid technological and a growing demand for innovation, a stronger emphasis has been placed on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The term was officially coined by the National Science Foundation about two decades ago, emphasizing the need for a more technologically savvy workforce to maintain global competitiveness. Such a focus has led the jobs within STEM to grow three times as fast as other occupations (McDougall, 2012). Recently, education scholars and practitioners have called for incorporation of arts and design in STEM courses and curricula, turning STEM into STEAM (i.e., science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics; Kim et al., 2019). Others have called for the integration of reading and writing, in addition to the arts, into STEM education, turning it into STREAM (i.e., science, technology, reading and writing, engineering, arts, and mathematics). More recently, scholars have called for the integration of humanities in general into STEM education (Skorton, 2019). Regardless of the term used, the basic premise of such an integration is that while we need specialists in each discipline, an interdisciplinary education would provide students with the opportunity to acquire a variety of skills, which subsequently results in more desirable outcomes, including “higher order thinking, creative problem solving, content mastery of complex concepts, enhanced communication and teamwork skills, and increased motivation and enjoyment of learning” (Bear & Skorton, 2018, p. 111). Such skills and competencies are necessary in the twenty-first century and are important for personal and professional success in the long run (Ee, Zhou, & Wong, 2014; Elias, 2009; Greenberg et al., 2003).

Despite the growing interest in the incorporation of arts and humanities into STEM education, our understanding of the current state of the literature on the flourishing effects of such an integration is limited from an empirical standpoint. Accordingly, the purpose of this chapter is first to briefly theorize about why such an integration enhances students’ flourishing, and second, to review existing evidence supporting the theory. The majority of past studies on the topic have focused on pedagogical approaches and tools to ST(R)EAM courses and curricula (e.g., Jeon & Park, 2016), have explored outcomes such as student engagement and content mastery (e.g., James, 2017; Magloire & Aly, 2013), or have examined ST(R)EAM education as a way to attract and retain individuals who are historically underrepresented in STEM (e.g., Bass, Hu Dahl, & Panahandeh, 2016; Kwon, 2017). While all are worthy endeavors, this chapter mainly focuses on flourishing outcomes of the integration that have received limited attention. We specifically focus on how integration of the arts and humanities in STEM education can enhance individuals’ subjective and psychological well-being, character and virtue (e.g., wisdom, courage, transcendence), creativity, and civic engagement, among others.

ST(R)EAM Education and Flourishing

There are two main approaches to ST(R)EAM education: (1) integrating activities related to the arts and humanities within a single STEM-related course (i.e., in-course integration); and (2) integrating various arts and humanities courses into STEM curricula (i.e., within-curriculum integration and co-curricular integration; Bear & Skorton, 2018). Accordingly, to develop our theoretical framework about flourishing effects of ST(R)EAM education (i.e., engagement with the arts and humanities while studying STEM majors and courses), we rely on recent conceptualizations that define engagement with the arts and humanities based on three conceptual frames, namely extensional (what), functional (how), and normative (why) frames (Shim, Tay, Ward, & Pawelski, 2019; Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018). From an extensional perspective, engagement with the arts and humanities consists of conducting various activities related to disciplines such as music, theatre, design, philosophy, history, literary studies, and religious studies, among others, that are typically organized within the same academic unit. From a functional perspective, any of these disciplines can be approached through a variety of modes (e.g., consuming, performing, creating, studying). Of particular interest is the normative frame that captures the primary goals of the arts and humanities (i.e., why they exist; Shim et al., 2019). Shim and colleagues (2019) identified three main themes of normative purposes of the arts and humanities: aesthetic experience, individual and societal growth, and meaning-making. That is, while there is a range of content and forms within the arts and humanities, their normative purpose is to either facilitate aesthetic experience, promote individual and societal development, or create and express meaning. In other words, what unites activities related to the arts and humanities is not their traditional organization within the same academic unit (i.e., liberal arts), but their common focus on human experience (Shim et al., 2019; Vaziri, Tay, Keith, & Pawelski, 2018).

Recent conceptual works suggest that engagement with the arts and humanities in general would have positive effects on individual flourishing and well-being. For instance, Tay and colleagues (2018) developed a conceptual model, suggesting that such engagement would result in enhanced subjective and psychological well-being, improved psychological competencies such as integrative complexity and creativity, and strengthened positive normative outcomes such as character and ethical and moral decision-making. Research comparing graduates of liberal arts colleges (LACs), which are heavily focused on courses related to the arts and humanities, with graduates of other types of institutions provides some evidence for this argument. For instance, research suggests that graduates of LACs reported higher learning, self-efficacy, leadership skills, and citizenship behaviors compared to graduates of public universities (Pascarella, Wolniak, Seifert, Cruce, & Blaich, 2005). Similarly, research suggests that leisure reading helps develop individuals’ social-cognitive abilities such as perspective thinking and empathy (Mumper & Gerrig, 2017). Accordingly, we argue that integrating elements of the arts and humanities into STEM curricula and courses would also provide similar positive effects for students’ flourishing and well-being.

We further argue that such enhanced well-being and flourishing are realized through the acquisition and reflectiveness mechanisms. Acquisition refers to “the set of socio-cognitive psychological processes that underlie the development of particular perspectives, habits, or skills” (Tay et al., 2018, p. 3), including experiences of mastery, vicarious experiences, direct encouragement, and positive physiological responses. That is, engagement with activities related to the arts and humanities would provide STEM students with the opportunity to acquire skills, abilities, and habits that would further promote their success in their careers and other aspects of life. Through the acquisition process, STEM students engaging in the arts and humanities can cultivate higher self-efficacy and self-esteem, form a strong sense of identity, and develop better psychological and subjective well-being.

Reflectiveness refers to “an intentional, cognitive-emotional process for developing, reinforcing, or discarding one’s habits, character, values, or worldview” (Tay et al., 2018, p. 4). That is, engagement with the arts and humanities provides an opportunity to gain insights about aspects of the self and facilitates the change process. Reflecting on the knowledge expressed through the arts and humanities promotes empathic feeling, enhances awareness of situational nuances, and provides fresh perspective (Eisner, 2008). Through reflectiveness, individuals can develop critical-thinking and perspective-thinking skills, which then results in an enhanced sense of meaning and purpose, moral compass, and civic engagement, among others (Batson et al., 1991; Catterall, Dumais, & Hampden-Thompson, 2012; Nussbaum, 2010). Recent studies also suggest that integrating the humanities within business courses encourages student reflection (Greenhalgh, Allen, & Nesteruk, 2020). Given the strong emphasis within the arts and humanities on reflectiveness and these “soft skills,” we argue that STEAM education would provide STEM students with more opportunities for reflection, which in turn leads to enhanced flourishing outcomes.

Empirical Evidence

In this section we provide a review of empirical evidence examining the influence of incorporating the arts and humanities into STEM courses and program. To this end, we searched Web of Science, Education Full Text, Education Source, and Educational Administration Abstracts using the search terms of STEM AND (STEAM OR Art OR Humanities) in the title or abstract. This resulted in 1,794 potentially relevant articles. An initial screening of the articles resulted in the exclusion of 1,355 articles. The remaining articles were further examined, and they were included if they (1) were empirical (either quantitative or qualitative); (2) examined STEM courses or programs integrated with arts and/or humanities; and (3) examined one or more flourishing outcomes. This resulted in eleven relevant studies. An overview of these studies is reported in Table 5.1.

The studies found in our review, though limited in number, generally support the hypothesis that integration of the arts and humanities into STEM education enhances a variety of flourishing outcomes for students. These studies suggest that the arts and humanities can be incorporated into a variety of STEM courses or programs, including microbiology, programing, and mechanical engineering, across different age groups from kindergarten (Garner, Gabitova, Gupta, & Wood, 2018) and teenagers (Ngamkajornwiwat, Pataranutaporn, Surareungchai, Ngamarunchot, & Suwinyattichaiporn, 2017) to college students (Adkins, Rock, & Morris, 2018). These studies also suggest that various activities and forms of arts and humanities activities can be used to develop a STEAM program, including visual arts (e.g., music and photography; Ghanbari, 2015), dance (Payton, White, & Mullins, 2017), animation (Liao, Motter, & Patton, 2016), and history (West, Cross, Kellogg, & Boysen, 2011), among others.

These studies also explored a variety of flourishing outcomes as a result of the integration of the arts and humanities into STEM. The most common outcome was enhancement in communication, cooperation, and teamwork among students, as well as improvement in critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. For instance, Ngamkajornwiwat and colleagues (2017) reported on a week-long workshop for designing social robots, which included a trip to a theatre, an acting lesson, a lesson on visual-musical relations, and a presentation on human anthropology and evolution. Participating students reported that the workshop allowed them to learn a variety of skills, including conflict resolution, friendship formation, and the ability to think critically. Similarly, in the “Back to the Future” program at South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, which is an engineering research program with an emphasis on art and history, students reported that they are more comfortable collaborating with others and that they developed better communication skills after the program (West et al., 2011).

Table 5.1 Summary of Studies Exploring STEAM and Flourishing Outcomes

Note: Quant. = Quantitative design; Qual. = Qualitative design.

Creativity was another outcome that was commonly examined and was boosted as a result of the STEAM programs. For instance, in a game-making STEAM program, in which students developed a game using a three-dimensional physics puzzler, students were rated higher on creativity and spatial abilities compared to a control group who only worked on a three-hour test session (Gallagher & Grimm, 2018). Similarly, creativity increased for students who participated in a two-week workshop, which included six STEAM and six non-STEAM programming lessons (Yee-King, Grierson, & D’Inverno, 2017). Furthermore, North Carolina State STEM students who participated in the school’s dance program reported that the program provided them with a space for self-expression and creativity (Payton et al., 2017).

Studies also reported that student’s self-efficacy (Adkins et al., 2018; Vuksanovich & Wallace, 2011), and perspective taking and reflection (Ghanbari, 2015; Ngamkajornwiwat et al., 2017) were enhanced following the STEAM course/program. However, no change in perception of belongingness was found (Adkins et al., 2018). In addition, some students reported having some challenges with their identity navigating a STEM and dance program simultaneously because of the stigma among their peers with regard to the dance program (Payton et al., 2017).

Avenues for Future Research

This chapter has provided a systematic review of empirical studies exploring whether and how the integration of the arts and humanities in STEM education enhances individual flourishing. Our review of the literature suggests that such an integration would enhance a variety of flourishing outcomes, including communication and cooperation, critical thinking, creativity, self-efficacy, perspective taking, and reflection. While the studies reviewed here generally support our theorizing about the flourishing effects of STEAM education through reflectiveness and acquisition processes, these studies are scarce and lack methodological rigor to develop a causal relationship between STEAM education and outcomes. For instance, many of the studies qualitatively report on students’ reflections and narratives after the program without any measurement prior to the course, or inclusion of a control group. In the following, we discuss ways through which future research can enhance our understanding of STEAM education.

Research examining the influence of STEAM education on individuals’ flourishing outcomes can benefit from a more rigorous study design. The studies reviewed here rarely measured these outcomes quantitatively and rigorously. While qualitative student narratives would provide a rich understanding of students’ experiences, they cannot determine a causal relationship between STEAM education and flourishing outcomes. Accordingly, future research should examine the relationship using an experimental design. Measuring the outcomes of interest before and after the STEAM program and incorporating a control group that go through a similar STEM course without an arts or humanities component would be helpful in causally demonstrating the beneficial effects of the integration of the arts and humanities and making sure that the positive effects are not attributed to any other factor (e.g., teacher attributes). Similarly, research should adopt a longitudinal design to explore the role of STEAM education in the long term. Longitudinal design would be helpful in disentangling the longevity and durability of STEAM education’s flourishing influence.

Future research should also examine an expanded set of flourishing outcomes. Communication and problem-solving were the two most common outcomes, followed by creativity, that were examined in the studies reviewed here. However, flourishing outcomes would also include subjective and psychological well-being, along with individuals’ character and virtue, which were seldom examined. Accordingly, exploring an expanded set of outcomes would enhance our understanding of the most applicable outcomes of STEAM education. Future research should also seek to examine how different arts and humanities components within the STEAM course would influence the flourishing outcomes. It is likely that certain course plans (e.g., arts and design) are more suitable to enhance specific aspects of individuals’ flourishing (e.g., creativity). For example, incorporating arts and design elements might be more relevant to creativity, whereas incorporating history might be more relevant to individuals’ character and perspective taking. In this review, we did not focus on the structure and pedagogical methods of integrating the arts and humanities into STEM education, as such a synthesis is beyond the scope of this chapter. However, we believe that STEAM education can considerably benefit from a better understanding of effective pedagogical methods to integrate the arts and humanities into STEM education as well.

Future research should also examine potential pitfalls of integrating the arts and humanities into STEM education. While the studies reviewed here do not suggest any discernible pattern of potential problems of STEAM education on individuals’ flourishing, one study found that STEM students participating in a dance program had difficulty managing their identity through their peers’ eyes because of the stigma associated with a dance identity among their peers (Payton et al., 2017). Accordingly, more research is needed to further understand potential pitfalls of STEAM education and how to avoid or address them.

Finally, while we only focused on integration of the arts and humanities into STEM education, there is growing discussion about the inclusion of STEM components into the arts and humanities programs. For instance, Guyotte, Sochacka, Costantino, Kellam, and Walther (2015) found that art education students who participated in a STEAM course reported reflecting on and challenging the notion of the “lone artist” and expanded their notion of creative thinking through a multidisciplinary lens. This stream of research is in its infancy, and future research is needed to further explore how arts and humanities students can benefit from STEAM education so that they can flourish.

References

Adkins, S. J., Rock, R. K., & Morris, J. J. (2018). Interdisciplinary STEM education reform: Dishing out art in a microbiology laboratory. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 365(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnx245

Bass, K. M., Hu Dahl, I., & Panahandeh, S. (2016). Designing the game: How a project-based media production program approaches STEAM Career readiness for underrepresented young adults. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 1009–1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9631-7

Batson, C. D., Batson, J. G., Slingsby, J. K., Harrell, K. L., Peekna, H. M., Todd, R. M., … Beaman, a L. (1991). Perspective taking: Imagining how another feels versus how you would feel. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22(3), 749–758. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.749

Bear, A., & Skorton, D. (Eds.). (2018). The integration of the humanities and arts with sciences, engineering, and medicine in higher education: Branches from the same tree. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.https://doi.org/10.17226/24988

Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies (Research Report #55). In National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530822

Ee, J., Zhou, M., & Wong, I. (2014). Teachers’ infusion of social emotional learning. Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(1), 27–45.

Eisner, E. (2008). Art and knowledge. In J. G. Knowles & A. L. Cole (Eds.), Handbook of the arts in qualitative research (pp. 3–12). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

Elias, M. J. (2009). Social-emotional and character development and academics as a dual focus of educational policy. Educational Policy, 23(6), 831–846. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904808330167

Gallagher, D., & Grimm, L. R. (2018). Making an impact: The effects of game making on creativity and spatial processing. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 28, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.05.001

Garner, P. W., Gabitova, N., Gupta, A., & Wood, T. (2018). Innovations in science education: Infusing social emotional principles into early STEM learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 889–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9826-0

Ghanbari, S. (2015). Learning across disciplines: A collective case study of two university programs that integrate the arts with STEM. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 16(7), 1–21.

Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58(6–7), 466–474. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466

Greenhalgh, A. M., Allen, D. E., & Nesteruk, J. (2021). Insight and sight: The interplay between the humanities and business and the impact on student well being. In J. O. Pawelski & L. Tay (Eds.), Oxford handbook of the positive humanities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Guyotte, K., Sochacka, N., Costantino, T., Kellam, N., & Walther, J. (2015). Collaborative creativity in STEAM: Narratives of art education students’ experiences in transdisciplinary spaces. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16(15), 1–38.

James, J. (2017). The PERFORM project: Using performing arts to increase engagement and understanding of science. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 364(8), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnx076

Jeon, B., & Park, J. W. (2016). Implementation of a modular robotic construction kit that fully supports science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics education. Advanced Science Letters, 22(11), 3413–3417. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2016.7968

Kim, Y. E., Morton, B. G., Gregorio, J., Rosen, D. S., Edouard, K., & Vallett, R. (2019). Enabling creative collaboration for all levels of learning. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 116(6), 1878–1885. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1808678115

Kwon, H. J. (2017). The design focused engineering outreach to a middle school using Arduino projects. Volume 3: 19th International Conference on Advanced Vehicle Technologies; 14th International Conference on Design Education; 10th Frontiers in Biomedical Devices, V003T04A001. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-67165

Liao, C., Motter, J. L., & Patton, R. M. (2016). Tech-Savvy Girls: Learning 21st-Century skills through STEAM digital artmaking. Art Education, 69(4), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1176492

Magloire, K., & Aly, N. (2013). SciTech kids electronic arts: Using STEAM to engage children all ages and gender. 2013 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2013.6525220

McDougall, P. (2012). U.S. tech worker shortage looms, study warns. InformationWeek. Retrieved from https://www.informationweek.com/it-strategy/us-tech-worker-shortage-looms-study-warns/d/d-id/1104496

Mumper, M. L., & Gerrig, R. J. (2017). Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000089

Ngamkajornwiwat, P., Pataranutaporn, P., Surareungchai, W., Ngamarunchot, B., & Suwinyattichaiporn, T. (2017). Understanding the role of arts and humanities in social robotics design: An experiment for STEAM enrichment program in Thailand. Proceedings of 2017 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering, TALE 2017, 457–460. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2017.8252378

Nussbaum, M. C. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pascarella, E. T., Wolniak, G. C., Seifert, T. A., Cruce, T. M., & Blaich, C. F. (2005). Liberal arts colleges and liberal arts education: New evidence on impacts. ASHE Higher Education Report, 31(3), 1–148.

Payton, F. C., White, A., & Mullins, T. (2017). STEM majors, art thinkers (STEM + Arts): Issues of duality, rigor and inclusion. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 18(3), 39.

Presley, L., Carroll, B., & Gorbet, R. (2016). It lives! A STEAM-based in-class workshop for promotion of creative and innovation thinking. ISEC 2016: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference, 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2016.7457546

Shim, Y., Tay, L., Ward, M., & Pawelski, J. O. (2019). Arts and humanities engagement: An integrative conceptual framework for psychological research. Review of General Psychology, 23(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019832847

Skorton, D. (2019). Branches from the same tree: The case for integration in higher education. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 116(6), 1865–1869. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1807201115

Tay, L., Pawelski, J. O., & Keith, M. G. (2018). The role of the arts and humanities in human flourishing: A conceptual model. Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(3), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1279207

Vaziri, H., Tay, L., Keith, M. G., & Pawelski, J. O. (2018). History, literature, and philosophy: A systematic review of positive functioning. Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(6), 695-723. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2018.1545041

Vuksanovich, B. D., & Wallace, D. R. (2011). Evaluation of STEM+art collaboration for multidisciplinary engineering technology laboratory. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-80051878117&partnerID=40&md5=f3497811e75bb8d2dc3517607b0de621

West, M., Cross, W., Kellogg, S., & Boysen, A. (2011). A novel REU program to develop the skills of the engineer of 2020. 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2011.6143019

Yee-King, M., Grierson, M., & D’Inverno, M. (2017). STEAM WORKS: Student coders experiment more and experimenters gain higher grades. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, 359–366. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7942873