Introduction

As Siegel (2009) says “The philosophy of education is a natural lens looking for parent disciplines
inwardly and educational practices outwardly. It encounters a broad spectrum of practical issue by
efficient working on either sides of traditional divides such as theory and experiential practices”. The
philosophical practices of education has implications in a variety of long standing applied philosophical
parameters such as epistemology, axiology, ontology, metaphysics, logics, and aesthetics also dealing
with social and political philosophies (Taylor etal, 2017). Educational theorists strive eagerly to achieve
conceptual accuracy, argumentative rigor and informed worth. The objectivity and purpose of science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) can results in wonders, if dealt with real essence,
ultimately opens a gateway of wisdom as Socrates once said “wonder is the beginning of wisdom”
(Vernon, 2007).

Nataly Z. Chesky is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Elementary Education at the State
University of New York at New Paltz. She completed her Bachelor's degree in May 1997, her Masters
degree in 2008, and her Doctor of Education, Pedagogy, and Philosophy degree in May 2013(Chesky,
2015). Dr.MarkWolfmeyer taught mathematics in secondary public schools before earning a PhD in Urban
Education from City University of New York's Graduate Center. He develops prospective math teachers
and teaches educational foundations as a teacher educator at Kutztown University of Pennsylvania. Dr.
Wolfmeyer has written numerous books, the most recent being Mathematics Education: A Critical
Introduction (Routledge, 2017). The book's two writers are mathematical experts (Chesky, 2015).

In this book, Mark Wolfmeyer and Nataly Chesky explore the various aims and assumptions that underlie
the various initiatives that are focused on improving the quality of life for children and adults in STEM
fields. The book gives a brief history of the development of STEM education and its analysis of the
multiple programs that have been criticized (Cheskyetal, 2015). According to the authors, STEM
education programs have been concentrated on economic development and militarism. They believe that
this field is to prepare well-rounded citizens and workers. Through their philosophical approach, the
authors explore the varied angles of STEM education programs and their relationship with the multiple
hypothetical assumptions that uphold them (Chesky etal, 2015). They believe that this approach can help
policymakers and instructors understand the complex web that connects all of the fields. The authors of
this book argue that the discourse around STEM is a socially constructed construct that responds to the
world's political and commercial conditions. They also believe that the programs that are aimed at
perfecting the quality of education in this field are antidemocratic and serve the interests of the powerful
and wealthy. They claim that these programs are bio-based but designed in such a way that reduces
scholars' access to natural resources.

Cheskyetal (2015) identifies and argued the essence of epistemologies, axiologies, and ontologies that
are current in the fields of mathematics, science education, and STEMdrawing parallels between these
dominant constructs and the pedagogies. Cheskyetal (2015) also argued transformative and traditional
approaches to the development of arithmetic and perceptivity education. The book relate to the multiple
pedagogies and ethnomathematics that are generally used in this field, identifying and arguing the
multiple social, artistic, and political issues that are involved in the development of STEM education. The
authors also argue the various axiologies lying currently in the fields of mathematics, science education,
and STEM, identifying multiple pretensions and hypotheticals that uphold the development of this field.
Development of human capital and consumerism are considered the main pretensions of STEM
education, with other possibilities being considered valuable for developing socially reconstructionist
schools. Chesky etal (2015) believe that STEM is deeply implanted in the societal enterprises and values
that it serves. They also believe that mathematics education aims to connect science with our culture and
society. The axiologies of this field are divided into three orders cognitive, utilitarian, and democratic,
giving illustrations of how these pretensions and hypotheticals can be blurred. They also argue the
various axiologies that are currently functional in the fields of mathematics, science, and STEM
education.

Through qualitative and quantitative styles, the authors of the book as mentioned above were able to
analyze various programs of which some programs were related to the development of math, and science
education. The authors also analyzed over 30 different programs some of which were available to the
public. The findings of this study were straightforward enough, with graphs and tables showing the
number of cases of each of the constructs. Axiological codes being the simplified type of coding typically
focused on the objectivity of policy. On the other hand, utilitarian axiology had the topmost number of
cases for coding. Traditional epistemology was found to be the most available coding whereas Ontologies
were found to be the least one. According to Wolfmeyer and Chesky (2015), aesthetic ontology had 87
circumstances, while absolutists had only seven. Although the authors do not provide a detailed method
for implementing their recommended radical changes in STEM education policy, their findings and
philosophical approach provide a framework for policymakers, educators, and administrators to evaluate
alternate strategies.

The aim of this easy is to provide the critical analysis of the book “Philosophy of STEM education” by
“Nataly Z. Chesky and Mark Wolfmeyer”. In particular, critiquing its Historical, Philosophical, and
Sociological aspects of the literature. Towards the end, there will be a rationale and a blend of conclusion
and suggestions.

History

STEM education has its roots in the Soviet Union's launch of the Sputnik satellite in 1957 (Sanders,
2008). This event led to a focus on science and math education in the United States. In the 1980s, the
National Science Foundation created the first national program to support STEM education since then,
STEM education has become a priority in many countries around the world (Kuenzi, 2008). STEM
education play important role in for preparing students for the workforce and ensuring that they have the
skills they need to succeed in the 21st century economy. In view of Chesky etal (2008), the philosophy of
STEM education is based on the idea that students should be exposed to STEM in an integrated way,
rather than as separate subjects. This approach is designed to help students develop a deeper
understanding of these subjects and to encourage them to think critically and creatively on how they can
be applied in real-world situations. Ultimately, the goal of STEM education is to prepare students for the
workforce by providing them with the skills they need to succeed in a rapidly changing world (Chesky,
2008).

John Dewey once said, “The actual initiation of history is always caused by ongoing situations and its
problems” (Dewey, 2012). Similarly, Vannevar Bush (1940) believed that science and technology could
be used to solve many of the world's problems. He argued that scientists and engineers needed to work
together to develop new technologies and that the government should support scientific research.
Vannevar Bush's ideas about science and technology were largely focused on improving economic
productivity and national security helping in laying foundation for the development of the internet,
invention of first electronic computer, creation of National Science Foundation (NSF) and other
technologies that have transformed the world, believing that scientific research and technological
development could help the United States to win the Cold War and maintain its position as a global
superpower. His ideas have had a lasting impact on science and technology policy around the world. In
response to Vannevar Bush's ideas Edgerton (2004) said that, Vannevar’s thoughts on science and
technology were too focused on military and industrial applications believing that his ideas did not give
enough attention to the social and ethical implications of scientific research and technological
development (Edgerton, 2004).

In 1958, the Defense Education Act was enacted by congress focusing on science, technology,
engineering and mathematics learning and teaching methodologies although STEM was not coined yet.
In 1999 Garet etal quoted Eisenhower's proposed programs, designed to promote careers, emphasizing
on the development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and communication skills, essential for
successful career Eisenhower's broad-based education would help to prepare students for the changing
demands of the modern workforce. Additionally, Eisenhower argued that programs designed to promote
careers should be grounded in a deep understanding of the social and economic forces that shape the job
market. He believed that such an understanding was necessary in order to identify the skills and
competencies that would be most valuable in the future, and to ensure that students were prepared for
the jobs of the future. Finally, Eisenhower argued that programs designed to promote careers and social
mobility should be accessible to all students, ensuring that all students had the opportunity to achieve
their full potential, regardless of their background or socioeconomic status. While Eisenhower's concept of
promoting careers through a broad-based education has been influential in the field of education, it has
also faced some criticism. Brauer (1982) argued that Eisenhower's approach overlooks the importance of
specialized training and knowledge in certain fields, such as medicine, engineering, and law. He also
argue that a broad-based education may not be sufficient for success in these fields, and that specialized
training and knowledge are essential. Additionally, Eisenhower's approach is overly focused on the needs
of the job market, and that it fails to acknowledge the intrinsic value of education for personal growth and
development. According to Kirillov etal (2015), education should be valued for its own sake, and not solely
for its instrumental value in promoting careers. Despite these criticisms, Eisenhower's concept has
contributed to a broader conversation about the role of education in promoting social mobility and
preparing students for the jobs of the future. In my point of view, It is important to note that there are
different views on the most effective approaches to education and career development, and that these
views may vary depending on individual circumstances and contexts.

Chesky etal (2015) analysed that the importance of these integrated disciplines was gaining attention,
Japan and West Germany have placed a strong emphasis on STEM education as a means of promoting
economic growth and technological innovation. In Japan, STEM education has been a key priority since
the 1950s, when the country began to rebuild its economy after World War II. The Japanese government
has invested heavily in STEM education, and has worked closely with industry to ensure that the skills
and knowledge taught in schools are aligned with the needs of the job market. Similarly, in West
Germany, STEM education has been seen as a key driver of economic growth and competitiveness
(Chesky etal, 2015). The German government has invested heavily in STEM education, and has worked
closely with industry to develop vocational training programs that provide students with the skills and
knowledge needed to succeed in the workforce. Both Japan and West Germany have also placed a
strong emphasis on developing a culture of innovation, and have encouraged entrepreneurship and the
development of new technologies. While Japan and West Germany have been successful in promoting
STEM education as a means of promoting economic growth and technological innovation, their approach
has also faced some criticism. Emanuel and Challons-lipton (2012) critiqued Chesky etal’s work that an
exclusive focus on STEM education may overlook the importance of other fields, such as the humanities
and social sciences, which are also important for fostering critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving
skills. They argued that a well-rounded education that includes a range of disciplines is essential for
preparing students for the complex challenges of the modern world. Additionally, Mickelson (2003) argued
that an exclusive focus on STEM education may exacerbate existing social and economic inequalities, as
students from substandard backgrounds may not have access to the same opportunities and resources
as their more privileged peers. I believe that Japan and Germany have highly educated workforce and
advanced technological advancements particularly in automobile and electronic industries which is an
extraordinary outcome of STEM education.

According to Bybee (2010), STEM education is essential for preparing students to be informed and
engaged citizens in a democratic society. Bybee (2010) argued that STEM education can help students
develop the critical thinking, problem-solving, and analytical skills they need to participate effectively in
the democratic process. This includes being able to analyze and evaluate scientific information, as well as
being able to communicate effectively with others about scientific and technical issues. Bybee (2010) also
believes that STEM education is essential for promoting civic engagement and for ensuring that citizens
are able to make informed decisions about important issues that affect their lives and their communities.
Tucker (2012) also argued that a strong educational system was essential for promoting social mobility
and reducing economic inequality, believing that STEM education could help to create more equitable
and prosperous society.Nussbaum (2006) emphasised that STEM education can lead to the neglection of
other important subjects, such as the arts and humanities along with focusing on technical skills and job
preparation which comes at the expense of developing broader critical thinking and problem-solving skills.
Additionally, Levinson (2010) argued that the emphasis on STEM education can reinforce existing social
and economic inequalities by favoring students who have access to high-quality STEM education and
resources. i agree with the ideology of Nussbaum as her view on importance of STEM education for
democracy, role of emotions in politics, encouraging social justice.

References

Vernon, M.(2007). Socrates’ Quest: the Beginning of Wisdom. In After Atheism: Science, Religion and the
Meaning of Life (pp. 13-38). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

Chesky, N.Z., Wolfmeyer, M.R., Chesky, N.Z. and Wolfmeyer, M.R. (2015). Introduction to STEM
Education. Philosophy of STEM Education: A Critical Investigation, pp.1-16.

Badiou, A.(2018). Badiou and His Interlocutors: Lectures, Interviews and Responses. Bloomsbury
Publishing

Siegel, H.(2009). The Oxford handbook of philosophy of education. Oxford University Press.

Taylor, P.C., Alcoff, L.M. and Anderson, L. (2017). The Routledge companion to the philosophy of race.
Routledge.
Kuenzi, J.J., 2008. Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education:
Background, federal policy, and legislative action.

Edgerton, D., 2004. ‘The linear model’did not exist: Reflections on the history and historiography of
science and research in industry in the twentieth century. The science-industry nexus: History, policy,
implications, pp.31-57

Garet, M.S., Birman, B.F., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L. and Herman, R., 1999. Designing Effective
Professional Development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program [and] Technical Appendices

Hernandez, L.M., Rosenstock, L. and Gebbie, K. eds., 2003. Who will keep the public healthy?: educating
public health professionals for the 21st century.
Brauer, C.M., 1982. Kennedy, Johnson, and the war on poverty. The Journal of American History, 69(1),
pp.98-119.

Kirillov, A.V., Tanatova, D.K., Vinichenko, M.V. and Makushkin, S.A., 2015. Theory and practice
of time-management in education. Asian Social Science, 11(19), pp.193-204.

Emanuel, R.C. and Challons-Lipton, S., 2012. Helping students transition to critical and creative thinking
at the intersection of communication and art. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science,
2(11), pp.1-9

Mickelson, R.A., 2003. When are racial disparities in education the result of racial discrimination? A
social science perspective. Teachers College Record, 105(6), pp.1052-1086.

Bybee, R. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher.
70(1), 30–35.

Nussbaum, M.C., 2006. Education and democratic citizenship: Capabilities and quality
education. Journal of human development, 7(3), pp.385-395.

(Levinson, R., 2010. Science education and democratic participation: An uneasy congruence?.
Studies in Science Education, 46(1), pp.69-119.)

Tucker, M. (2012). STEM: Why it makes no sense. National Center on Education and the Economy.
http://www.ncee.org/2012/06/stem-why-it-makes-no-sense/