STEM/STEAM Education: What to Choose, and What It Can Do

Why this topic is on parents’ minds

“STEM,” “STEAM”—these are words that have become common in education articles and class flyers over the past few years. A mother with a 5-year-old may find thoughts like these crossing her mind.

• In what people call the AI era, won’t my child struggle later if they are not strong in math and science?
• Programming is now required in elementary school. Should I have my child do STEM on top of that?
• Other children around us have started LEGO robots or WonderBox. Is our family falling behind?
• Classes cost more than ¥10,000 a month, and kits cost tens of thousands of yen. Does it really mean anything?

Bookstores and social media are lined with headlines like “Raise a child who can compete globally with STEM education” and “STEAM starting before school.” At the same time, there are reasonable questions: “So, should I just buy LEGO?” “If I send my child to a class, will they become strong in science?”

To give the conclusion first: as long as you read the research and public materials honestly, there is no evidence that firmly supports “sending your child to a STEM class will make them strong in science and math later.” However, there are many activities that nurture “an attitude of exploring” in the everyday life of early childhood, and they do not require special materials. In this article, we lay this out.

First, let’s check what “STEM/STEAM education” actually is

When people hear “STEM education,” many picture “programming classes,” “robot kits,” or “experiment classes.” In fact, STEM refers to a broader view of education.

STEM — Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics

STEM is an acronym for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. It is an administrative and policy term that the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) began using in the 1990s, and it was originally a framework for “thinking about education and workforce development across the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.”

Behind the wide use of this term in the United States is a sense of crisis about international economic competitiveness. From the 1980s on, as U.S. students’ scores in international comparisons of math and science stalled, a direction toward “education in solving real problems across subjects” instead of “fragmented subject-by-subject education” was set out at the policy level.

the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) (2011)

Successful K-12 STEM Education, published by the National Research Council (The National Academies Press)

organizes the aims of STEM education in K-12 (kindergarten through high school) as follows.

• Developing experts in STEM fields (future scientists and engineers)
• Developing citizens with STEM literacy (citizens who think scientifically and can make decisions in a technological society)
• Securing diverse pathways toward further study and employment in STEM fields

What we want to stress here is that the central aim of STEM education is not only “making future scientists.” Rather, it puts first that every child has an attitude of inquiry about “how to understand the world and how to engage with it.”

STEAM — the significance of adding the Arts

“STEAM” is an expanded concept that adds A (the Arts: art, the humanities, and design) to STEM.

Yakman (2008)

The “STEAM Education” framework presented at the PATT Conference by Georgette Yakman, an education researcher in Georgia

is the most frequently cited origin of this concept. Yakman argued that while STEM tends to focus on “logic, analysis, and problem solving,” adding the Arts (art, the humanities, and design) makes it integrated learning that includes “beauty,” “context,” and “meaning for people.”

In Japan, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry have also adopted the term “STEAM education,” and it is positioned as “learning that deals with real problems across subjects.”

The Japanese context — enhancing science education, and Society 5.0

In Japan, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, in Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2022)the Central Council for Education’s report “On Enhancing Science Education in Primary and Secondary Education”, positions science education as a place to nurture “the ability to become familiar with nature, carry out observations and experiments with a sense of direction, and solve problems scientifically.” Meanwhile, the Cabinet Office (2021)“Society 5.0” (super-smart society) put forward by the Cabinet Office describes a society in which AI, IoT, robotics, and other technologies are built into daily life, and names “the ability to solve problems across fields and through inquiry” as the kind of person who will live in it.

In other words, in Japan the term “STEM/STEAM” is discussed in two contexts: “an extension of science education” and “developing people for the Society 5.0 era.” Both point less toward “gifted education to make future researchers” and more toward “the ability of every child to think, choose, and engage independently in a technological society.”

The history of STEM education — how it spread

Here is a brief timeline of how the term and idea of STEM/STEAM education spread.

1. 1990s

   The U.S. NSF begins using "STEM" as an administrative term

   The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) adopted "SMET" and "STEM" as a policy framework cutting across the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. The background was stalled international math and science scores and a sense of crisis about economic competitiveness.

2. 2008

   Yakman presents the STEAM framework

   Georgette Yakman, an education researcher in Georgia, proposed "STEAM Education" at the PATT Conference. Adding the Arts (art, the humanities, and design), she presented a framework aiming at integrated learning that is not purely about logic.

3. 2011

   The U.S. NRC publishes Successful K-12 STEM Education

   The National Research Council published a summary of effective STEM education in K-12. It positioned the aims as two wheels: "developing future experts" and "developing citizens with STEM literacy."

4. 2014

   Honey et al. publish STEM Integration in K-12 Education

   It organized the current state of and research questions for approaches that teach subjects in an integrated way rather than separately (STEM Integration). It concluded cautiously that the effect of sparking short-term interest is clear, but that more research is needed on long-term academic transfer.

5. 2016

   Japan's Cabinet Office proposes "Society 5.0"

   The vision of a "super-smart society" built on AI, IoT, and robotics was published. It named "the ability to solve problems across fields and through inquiry" as the desired kind of person, influencing education policy.

6. 2020

   Programming education becomes required in Japanese elementary schools

   With the revision of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology's Courses of Study, programming education became required in elementary schools. Discussion of STEM/STEAM education took off in earnest among both families and the education industry.

7. 2020s

   The market for STEAM materials and classes expands

   STEM/STEAM materials and education services for homes and classes diversified, including WonderBox, LEGO WeDo and SPIKE, Robodan, and FabLab. Meanwhile, organizing the "evidence of effects" has not yet caught up.

Looking at the history, STEM/STEAM education is “a framework for cross-subject, inquiry-based learning that began with U.S. policy on economic competitiveness,” and in Japan it has been taken up in two contexts: “enhancing science education” and “developing people for the Society 5.0 era.” To put it frankly, the current picture is that the market for classes and materials expanded first, and the organization of research evidence has not yet caught up.

What does the research say?

Finding 1: The content of “STEM activities” differs between early childhood and school age

Based on the summaries by the NRC (2011) and Honey et al. (2014), the content of STEM activities differs greatly between early childhood (ages 3 to 5) and school age (age 6 and up).

Bers (2008)

Blocks to Robots: Learning with Technology in the Early Childhood Classroom by Marina Bers of Tufts University

presents the view of STEM in early childhood as “Coding as a Playground.” Bers argues that for young children, it is natural, both in terms of research and development, to position STEM not as “getting a head start on future science learning” but as “a playground for tinkering with the world,” in the same sense as the sandbox or clay.

In other words, “starting STEM education” for a preschool child does not mean buying a kit and sitting them down at a desk. It means increasing “Why?”, “What will happen?”, and “Let’s try it” in everyday life at home.

Finding 2: The reality of research on “STEM makes children strong in science”

“Children who received STEM education will become strong in science later”—how far can research actually say this?

Honey and colleagues (2014)

STEM Integration in K-12 Education, edited by Honey, Pearson, & Schweingruber (National Research Council)

is a report that comprehensively organizes research on integrated STEM education in K-12. Summarizing its conclusions while avoiding misunderstanding, they are as follows.

• In the short term, multiple studies have confirmed that well-designed STEM activities increase children’s experiences of “interest in and attitudes toward science,” “excitement about making things,” and “collaborative problem solving”
• On the other hand, research on whether this leads in the long term to “better academic performance” or “going on to STEM fields” is still limited, and the effect sizes and conditions are questions for future research
• More than “whether or not a child received STEM education,” what matters is “what quality of STEM experience it was (the quality of the teacher, the depth of inquiry, and the connection with the child’s interests)”

In other words, the research summary shows a careful and honest stance: “STEM activities clearly mean something as short-term sparks of interest and experiences. Strong claims cannot yet be made about long-term academic transfer.”

Finding 3: Maker culture and Tinkering

An important pair of keywords often discussed alongside STEM/STEAM is “Maker” and “Tinkering.”

• Maker: A culture of making things with your own hands. A culture of enjoying making things while sharing DIY-style tools such as 3D printers and laser cutters, at places like FabLab, makerspaces, and Maker Faire
• Tinkering: A way of learning by moving your hands and trying things out, “just making it work somehow,” including failures. Instead of being taught the steps in advance, you try, break, and fix things yourself, over and over

What is essentially important for STEM in early childhood is the experience of “tinkering, failing, and trying again,” rather than “reaching the right answer quickly.” Both Bers and Resnick have consistently stressed this point.

At home, it might be your child rolling clay into a ball, squashing it, and rolling it again. Stacking blocks high, knocking them down, and stacking them again. Spilling while helping with cooking, wiping it up, and measuring again—experiences of “enjoying the process more than the result” are exactly the foundation of STEM.

Finding 4: Gender bias starts with what families say

The small number of girls in STEM fields is discussed as a serious issue both worldwide and in Japan. In Japan, the share of female students in science and engineering at universities and graduate schools stays at around 20%, which is low by international comparison.

Research has shown again and again that this gender bias starts not at school age but at an earlier stage, with “what families say,” “how toys are chosen,” and “how the media portrays things.”

• Unconscious comments like “You’re a girl, so wouldn’t you like a doll better?” or “Boys like robots, right?”
• Toy aisles divided by color: pink play-kitchen sets vs. blue LEGO
• Media that shows scientists and engineers as almost all men

The NRC (2011) and Honey et al. (2014) also conclude that narrowing the gender gap in STEM fields requires not only “interventions at school age” but also “designing the environment from early childhood.” Not saying “because you’re a girl / because you’re a boy” at home, and offering robots, blocks, and play kitchens regardless of gender—these are the most important practices implied by the research.

How to read the four findings

To sum up, research and public materials paint the following picture.

• STEM in early childhood can be experienced fully as an extension of everyday activities at home, not through kits or classes (Bers, NRC)
• STEM activities clearly have a short-term effect of sparking interest; more research is needed on long-term academic transfer (Honey et al.)
• The essence is “tinkering” and “trial and error, including failure” (Bers, Maker culture)
• Gender bias starts with what families say and the environment (NRC, Honey et al.)

At present, there is no research supporting “if you don’t send your child to a STEM class, they will be weak in science later.” Rather, research points to everyday “why?” at home, combined with materials and classes that match the child’s interests.

Major STEM/STEAM services and materials

For reference, here are STEM/STEAM-related services and materials that are widely known in Japan today, with age guidelines and price ranges. Please read this as an overview of options, not as a recommendation of “this is the one.”

Here is a frank summary of the price ranges and how they work.

• STEM/STEAM classes: monthly fees are generally ¥5,000 to ¥15,000 a month. Enrollment fees and materials fees are separate. Most are for elementary school age and up; options for preschoolers are limited
• STEM kits and materials: one-time purchases of ¥5,000 to ¥30,000 (the LEGO WeDo and SPIKE lines, Arduino starter kits, etc.). Subscription types are ¥3,000 to ¥5,000 a month (WonderBox, etc.)
• Free and low-cost options: Viscuit, ScratchJr, micro:bit’s online environment, workshops at municipal science centers, etc.

To repeat, no evidence has been confirmed that “the more expensive, the more effective.” As Bers says, what matters most in the preschool years is “tinkering,” “trial and error,” and “conversations about ‘why?’,” and these are activities that work perfectly well in the kitchen, the park, and the bookshelf.

STEM activities you can do at home — no special materials needed

Following the research summaries, here are STEM activities you can start at home in the preschool years without buying special materials. The common implication of Bers (2008), the NRC (2011), and Honey et al. (2014) is that the essence of STEM in early childhood is “exploration within everyday life.”

1. Cooking — a treasure trove of measuring, change, and planning steps

Time spent cooking with your child is itself a fine STEM activity.

• Measuring (Mathematics): measure “1 tablespoon” or “half a cup” together
• Observing change (Science): crack an egg and watch the white set, watch bread dough rise, watch water boil
• Planning steps (Engineering): put together a sequence such as “first cut the vegetables, then stir-fry the meat”
• Plating (Arts): play with color, shape, and empty space when arranging food on a plate

Just thinking together—“I wonder why bread rises?” “What happens to the water if we add sugar?”—is a real conversation of inquiry.

2. Bath time — a physics lab

For preschoolers, the bath is the most familiar physics lab.

• What floats and what sinks (buoyancy)
• When you scoop water with a cup and pour it, where does it come out (continuity)
• What happens when you mix hot and cold water (heat transfer)
• Why does the mirror fog up? (condensation)

“Do you think this will float? Or sink?” “Let’s try it.”—these three phrases are at the core of STEM in early childhood.

3. Watching plants, the night sky, and bugs — a dialogue with nature

Plants on the balcony or in the park, the moon and stars at night, bugs on the ground—time spent observing nature is the root of Science.

• Plant morning glory seeds, water them every day, and observe how the leaves change
• Draw in a picture diary how the shape of the moon changes from day to day
• Crouch down together to watch pill bugs and lines of ants in the park

“What’s different from yesterday?” “I wonder where this ant is going?”—observation and questions are already inquiry. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology’s (2022) report on science education also clearly states “becoming familiar with nature” as the starting point of science education.

4. Playing with magnets, water, and sand

Magnets you can buy at a 100-yen shop, water in the bath or kitchen, sand in the park—these are all fine STEM materials.

• Experiment all over the house to find “things magnets stick to” and “things they don’t”
• Sand changes shape when you mix it with water, and turns smooth and dry when it dries
• Poke holes in a paper cup and “experiment” with where the water comes out

Through this play, children pick up the most basic sense of science: “the properties of materials,” “patterns of change,” and “predicting and testing.”

5. Play that involves “breaking and fixing” and “building”

An old alarm clock, a broken calculator, an empty cardboard box—when you hand them to your child and say “you can take it apart,” they may become absorbed in pulling out the insides and lining them up. This is the origin of Maker culture and Tinkering.

• Taking apart old toys (with attention to safety)
• Crafts with cardboard (cutting, sticking, building)
• Making a “secret base” or “a shop” out of empty boxes

An atmosphere of “It’s OK to fail; let’s take it apart and then think” is exactly the foundation of STEM.

Dialogue

If you are actually going to do it, how should you go about it?

Based on research and public materials, here is what families can do in the preschool years.

1. Make “Why?”, “What will happen?”, and “Let’s try it” your family’s habits

This is the most important practice for STEM in the preschool years. When your child finds something, instead of explaining “this is ___,” think together: “Why do you think it’s like this?” Try things together: “What would happen if we did this? Let’s try it.” Look back together: “Oh, that’s what happened. I wonder why?”

This is the home version of what Bers calls “Coding as a Playground” and what Honey et al. call “Inquiry-based STEM.” It needs neither money nor kits.

2. Try calling cooking, bath time, and watching plants “STEM time”

Just being aware of the cooking, baths, and walks you already do as “STEM time” changes the way you talk with your child.

• Cooking: measure “1 tablespoon” together, observe the moment an egg sets
• Bath time: observe floating and sinking, the flow of water, and the fogging mirror together
• Walks: pay a little attention every day to changes in plants, bugs, and the sky

Not “creating new time,” but “adding an eye for exploration to time you already have”—this is STEM that puts no strain on your budget or your schedule.

3. Make use of 100-yen shops and home centers

Without buying special materials, you can put together plenty of STEM activities with magnets, magnifying glasses, measuring cups, and colored-water sets from a 100-yen shop, and craft materials from a home center.

• With a magnet set, explore “what in the house it sticks to”
• Observe leaves and bugs with a magnifying glass
• Measure amounts of water with a measuring cup; make colored water and mix colors
• Make a “secret base” with cardboard and tape

These are the home version of Maker culture and Tinkering.

4. Kits and materials “after seeing interest,” and start with free ones

When your child shows strong interest in giving instructions or in building, that is the time to consider materials. However, before jumping to expensive kits or classes, trying free and low-cost options first is the approach that follows the implications of the research.

• Viscuit, ScratchJr (free apps, preschool to early elementary)
• Workshops at municipal science centers and museums (often free to a few hundred yen)
• Visits and hands-on sessions at FabLab (depends on the facility)
• Second-hand LEGO DUPLO, hand-me-downs from friends, or considering it as a birthday present

There is no kit that, by research or in reality, “you will fall behind if you don’t buy before elementary school.” For details, please also see the article on programming education and the article on educational toys (Japanese).

5. Classes, if your child wants “experiences you can’t bring out at home”

At present, there is no evidence that attending STEM classes from preschool decides advantages or disadvantages from elementary school on. On the other hand, classes can mean something as an option when your child wants experiences you can’t bring out at home (building real robots, 3D printers, making things together with peers, and so on).

Monthly fees are generally ¥5,000 to ¥15,000 a month. It is enough to consider them within reasonable limits, looking at both your household budget and your child’s interests.

6. Watch out for gender bias at home

Do not say “because you’re a girl / because you’re a boy.” Offer LEGO, play-kitchen sets, robots, and magnifying glasses regardless of gender. When a female scientist or engineer appears on TV or in a picture book, naturally put it into words: “Oh, women do this kind of work too.”

This is the intervention most practical for families among those the NRC and Honey et al. have repeatedly stressed for narrowing the gender gap in STEM.

Closing dialogue

Research details

Primary sources

StrongNational Research Council2011The National Academies Press

Study design: A review and integrated report of existing research by a public research body

Scope: A comprehensive summary of research on multiple schools and curricula, aimed at identifying effective approaches to STEM education in U.S. K-12 (kindergarten through high school)

Main conclusions: It organizes the aims of K-12 STEM education as three pillars: (1) developing future experts in STEM fields, (2) developing citizens with STEM literacy, and (3) securing diverse paths. As conditions for “effective STEM education,” it names the quality of teachers, inquiry-based learning design, integration across subjects, and connection with families and communities. “Every child becoming a citizen who can think scientifically” is positioned as the central goal of STEM education.

Limitations: It is a summary for U.S. K-12, and applying it directly to early childhood education in Japan requires translating the context. It clearly states that further research is needed on long-term effects.

StrongHoney, Pearson, & Schweingruber (Eds.)2014National Academies Press

Study design: A comprehensive summary of research on “integrated STEM education” by a public research body

Scope: The body of research on approaches that teach Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics across subjects and in an integrated way (STEM Integration) in K-12

Main results: Multiple studies confirm that integrated STEM education in the short term increases experiences of “interest in and attitudes toward science,” “excitement about making things,” and “collaborative problem solving”. On the other hand, research on long-term effects on “better academic performance” and “going on to STEM fields” is still limited. It concludes that “what quality of STEM experience it was” matters more than “whether or not a child received STEM education,” and that the quality of teachers, the depth of inquiry, and the connection with the child’s interests determine the effects.

Limitations: It is a summary for K-12, and direct application to early childhood (ages 3 to 5) is outside the scope of the report. The body of research itself is still developing, and further research is needed to reach definitive conclusions.

Bers2008Teachers College Press (book)

Study design: A book by the author (head of the DevTech Research Group at Tufts University) summarizing her research and practice in technology education in early childhood

Scope: The design and practice of learning that integrates blocks, robots, and programming in early childhood classrooms

Main argument: It presents the view of technology education in early childhood as “Coding as a Playground.” It argues that for young children, it is natural both developmentally and educationally to position STEM not as “getting a head start on future science learning” but as “a playground for tinkering with the world,” in the same sense as the sandbox or clay. It became the basis for the design thinking behind later developments such as the KIBO robot and ScratchJr.

Limitations: It is not an empirical study but a book that integrates the author’s research and practice. For specific tests of effects, related empirical studies (Bers et al. 2014, etc.) need to be consulted.

Yakman2008Pupils' Attitudes Towards Technology (PATT) Conference Proceedings

Study design: An essay proposing an educational framework

Scope: A proposal for a framework that adds the Arts (art, the humanities, and design) to STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) and rebuilds it as an integrated education model

Main argument: It argues that while STEM tends to focus on “logic, analysis, and problem solving,” adding the Arts (art, the humanities, and design) makes it integrated learning that includes “beauty,” “context,” and “meaning for people.” It is one of the most frequently cited essays as the origin of the term STEAM, and it influenced later education policy and curriculum discussions in many countries.

Limitations: It proposes a conceptual framework and is not an empirical study of effects. The specific effects of introducing STEAM need to be tested by later practice-based research.

StrongMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology2022Central Council for Education, Subdivision on Elementary and Secondary Education, related materials

Study design: Public guidelines and report materials

Scope: The basic approach to and measures for enhancing science education in Japanese primary and secondary education

Main content: It describes the aim of science education as nurturing “the ability to become familiar with nature, carry out observations and experiments with a sense of direction, and solve problems scientifically.” It recommends inquiry-based learning through observation and experiments, and cross-subject approaches in the style of STEAM education. It clearly states that experiences of “becoming familiar with nature” from early childhood are the foundation of science education at school age.

Limitations: It is a public guideline and does not provide new empirical data. Much is left to the creativity of each school and each teacher.

Cabinet Office2021Cabinet Office, Science, Technology and Innovation Promotion Secretariat, related materials

Study design: A policy vision document

Scope: A conceptual outline of “Society 5.0” (a super-smart society), the future society Japan aims for, and its implications for developing people

Main content: It defines a “super-smart society” in which AI, IoT, robotics, and other technologies are built into daily life as Society 5.0, and names “the ability to solve problems across fields and through inquiry” as the kind of person who will live in that society. In the field of education, it was positioned as one of the contexts in which cross-subject learning, STEAM education, and inquiry-based learning are recommended.

Limitations: It is a policy vision, not a demonstration of specific educational effects. Note that the claim “STEM is needed because it is the Society 5.0 era” is a policy-based, normative claim, not a causal relationship tested by research.