Putting the 'W' in STEM

There has been a lot of excitement in the academic community about the new Dayton Regional STEM school set to launch in Fall of 2009. As you may know, STEM stands for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. It is in these critical areas that the school aims to prepare students for the new knowledge economy of the twenty-first century. Certainly an emphasis on these areas of learning is appropriate, but conspicuously missing from this formulation is the letter W – for Writing – which can serve as the root that allows the STEM school and its students to flower.

According to an article in the Dayton Business Journal, the “STEM school curriculum will feature typical classes like, history and language arts.” However, it is clear that writing currently takes a distant back seat in the school’s educational plans. If this oversight isn’t corrected, the school’s goal, as expressed by Gregory R. Bernhardt, dean of Wright State University’s College of Education and Human Services and chief facilitator for the STEM school, “to prepare students with the skills necessary to compete in our rapidly changing economy” will be seriously jeopardized.

The National Commission on Writing, a research and advocacy group formed by the College Board, has been working with educators, businesses, and government to understand the important role writing plays in the success of students and workers alike. In their seminal report, “The Neglected ‘R’: The Need for a Writing Revolution,” the commission discovered what composition teachers have long known: “If students are to make knowledge their own, they must struggle with the details, wrestle with the facts, and rework raw information and dimly understood concepts into language they can communicate to someone else. In short, if students are to learn, they must write” (9). They further concluded that “The reward of disciplined writing is the most valuable job attribute of all: a mind equipped to think. Writing today is not a frill for the few, but an essential skill for the many” (11). Clearly, then, writing is critical to success in both the classroom and the boardroom.

In one of several follow-up reports, “Writing and School Reform,” the commission further established the importance of writing as a core skill at the root of student learning:

In the past, the best schools placed great emphasis on writing. Grammar, rhetoric, and logic (saying things properly, saying them well, and saying them in a way that makes sense) were seen as cornerstones of powerful educational strategies. Exclusive private schools continue to rely on them. The valuable tool of writing must be put back in the hands of schoolteachers, not because writing is an optional talent that students might find useful at some point in their lives, but because writing (and the conceptual skills it reflects and develops) opens up new and powerful means of learning for all students (16).

Leading educators participating in commission-lead discussion forums developed a strong consensus that “the widespread use of writing across curriculum areas, including mathematics and science, holds the promise of improving students’ writing competence” and “deepening subject-matter knowledge” (25 emphasis mine).

In a recent edition of Dialogue, a Wright State newsletter for faculty and staff, Susan Bodary, executive director of EDvention, characterized the goal of the STEM school as one of “prepar[ing] students who solve problems, create, innovate and lead us toward the future.” Clearly, if the school is to achieve that goal, writing must be a central element of the school’s curriculum.

Without writing as a root of learning, the STEM is unlikely to draw enough nutrients from its educational soil to allow its students to blossom.