Correlation between tools for thinking; arts, crafts, and design avocations; and scientific achievement among STEMM professionals

Abstract

Previous studies of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical (STEMM) professionals have identified a common “mental toolkit” composed of 13 “tools for thinking” that STEMM professionals use in their problem raising and problem solving. The present research surveyed a convenience sample of 225 STEMM professionals to investigate whether these “thinking tools” are correlated with STEMM achievement measured variously as patents filed or licensed, companies founded, number of papers and books published, and copyrights assigned. Some mental skills such as modeling and playing are significantly correlated with patent filings and licenses, and others are correlated with different measures of STEMM achievement. Previous research has also demonstrated that some of these thinking tools, most notably visual thinking skills, can be taught through various arts, crafts, and design (ACD) practices, resulting in significant improvements in STEMM learning outcomes. The present research therefore investigates in the survey pool whether ACD are associated with the same measures of STEMM achievement as thinking tool use. Correlations exist between use of some thinking tools and particular ACD avocations: Modeling and playing are correlated with persistent crafts avocations such as metalworking, woodworking, and mechanics, which are, in turn, significantly correlated with patent production. Most survey participants were explicitly aware of the connections between their ACD avocations; their STEMM work; and the tools, skills, and knowledge derived from the former. We conclude that integrating ACD with STEMM content by means of tools for thinking may be an effective way to achieve improved STEMM learning outcomes.

Creativity and collaboration: Revisiting cybernetic serendipity

“…Robert Root-Bernstein et al (38) report on the role of arts, crafts, and design avocations in promoting creative thinking among 225 STEMM (STEM + Medicine) professionals. Tantalizing results, such as the correlation of metal-and woodworking avocations with patent production, suggest that increased training for STEMM students could be an effective way to improve their outcomes.…”

Design science research for learning software engineering and computational thinking: Four cases

“…Teaching of such skills—commonly referred to as computational thinking (CT) skills—is nowadays widely recommended for educational institutions at all levels [87]. Many agree that CT and related design requires a combination of computational skills and skills in other fields of life, sciences and arts [78]. This combination is often referred to as integrated science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) education [78].…”

“…Many agree that CT and related design requires a combination of computational skills and skills in other fields of life, sciences and arts [78]. This combination is often referred to as integrated science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) education [78]. In addition, many stress the importance of soft skills, such as creativity, communication and critical thinking skills, often referred to as 21st century (C21) competencies [84].…”

“…In training future engineers, hard engineering skills are not enough—social skills, communication and attitudes count as well [42]. Many agree that CT, integrated STEAM, and C21 competencies are of high importance [78,84,87]. However, there is a lack of consensus and guidelines on how to effectively integrate them into educational practice.…”

Creative Polymathy and the COVID-19 Crisis

“…Previous research has found that polymathy may be a crucial element for creativity, especially in contexts that are novel, transdisciplinary, or which require a shift in perspective (Sriraman and Søndergaard, 2009;Gombrich, 2016;Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein, 2020b). However, despite the general claim that creativity and innovation are important and despite the role of polymathy for creativity and innovation to flourish (Simonton and Cassandro, 2010;Root-Bernstein et al, 2019), the dominant culture in both the industry and academia is that of specialization. To be successful as a professional, one is expected to focus very narrowly, avoid giving "mixed messages" regarding one's expertise, and often advised to split one's interests and passions between those that are "vocational"-and deserve one's true attention-and those that are "avocational, " and should not take precious time away from one's main specialty (see also Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein, 2004;Root-Bernstein, 2009;Araki, 2018).…”