Abstract
Education reforms are rarely successful or free of controversies. However, efforts to STEM-ify public education in the USA by positioning education in STEM fields and training of future workforce as the central purposes of public schooling is proving to be remarkably successful and devoid of contention. This paper explains the success of STEM-ification of public education in the USA by examining these reform efforts from the perspective of depoliticization. With special reference to the implementation of STEM reforms in the state of Georgia, USA, we analyze STEM reforms as a case of network governance to elaborate its features that contribute to its depoliticization. Then, we examine these reforms as a case where we see three concurrent modes of depoliticization—governmental, societal, and discursive. Our analysis presents the depoliticization of STEM reforms in the USA as an example of governance techniques in the current times that legitimize neoliberalism as the dominant political rationality with profound implications for the diminution of democratic space and perpetuation of injustices of misrepresentation in advanced societies. The paper ends with an appeal for repoliticization of STEM reforms and sustained attention to this issue among educators and researchers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
100Kin10. (n.d.). Our story. Retrieved 15 March, 2017, from https://100kin10.org/about.
Ball, S. J. (2012). Global Education Inc.: New policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. Routledge.
Bang, H., & Esmark, A. (2009). Good governance in network society: Reconfiguring the political from politics to policy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 31(1), 7–37. https://doi.org/10.2753/ATP1084-1806310101
Bencze, L., Reiss, M., Sharma, A., & Weinstein, M. (2018). STEM education as ‘Trojan horse’: Deconstructed and reinvented for all. In L. Bryan & K. Tobin (Eds.), Thirteen questions in science education (pp. 69–87). Peter Lang.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006). Governance stories. Routledge.
Bogason, P., & Zølner, M. (2006). Methods in democratic network governance. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Bullock, E. (2017). Only STEM can save us? Examining race, place, and STEM education as property. Educational Studies, 53(6), 628–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2017.1369082
Bryld, E. (2000). The technocratic discourse: Technical means to political problems. Development in Practice, 10(5), 700–705. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520050195571
Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998
Cappelli, P. H. (2015). Skill gaps, skill shortages, and skill mismatches: Evidence and arguments for the United States. ILR Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793914564961
Carter, L. (2016). Neoliberalism and STEM education. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 31–41.
Change The Equation. (2012). A business leader’s guide to mobilizing state action on STEM. Change the Equation.
Davis, J. (2014). Georgia joins national teaching fellowship program. Atlanta Journal Constitution. Retrieved 30 August, 2017, from https://www.ajc.com/news/local/georgia-joins-national-teaching-fellowship-program/BGjCHvrLBWwoZKbSYnAjmK/.
Dean, M. (2009). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. SAGE Publications.
Diamond, P. (2013). New Labour and the politics of depoliticisation: The delivery agenda in Britain’s public services 1997–2007. Transforming Policy and Politics: The Future of the State in the 21st Century.
Eroukhmanoff, C. (2017). Securitisation theory. In S. McGlinchey, R. Walters, & C. Scheinpflug (Eds.), International relations theory (pp. 104–109). E-International Relations Publishing.
Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. V. Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 258–284). Sage.
Fawcett, P., Flinders, M., Hay, C., & Wood, M. (2017). Anti-politics, depoliticization, and governance. Oxford University Press.
Flinders, M., & Buller, J. (2006). Depoliticisation: Principles, tactics and tools. British Politics, 1(3), 293–318. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.bp.4200016
Flinders, M., & Wood, M. (2014). Depoliticisation, governance and the state. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312X655873
Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2016). The democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0049
Foster, E. A., Kerr, P., & Byrne, C. (2014). Rolling back to roll forward: Depoliticisation and the extension of government. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312X655945
Georgia Department of Education. (n.d.). Georgia's race to the top (RT3) plan. Retrieved 3 September, 2017, from http://www.gadoe.org/Race-to-the-Top/Pages/default.aspx.
Governor's Office of Student Achievement. (n.d.). Georgia race to the top innovation fund application face sheet. Atlanta: Governor's Office of Student Achievement. Retrieved 3 September, 2017, from http://gosa.georgia.gov/sites/gosa.georgia.gov/files/IF%20GA%20Tech%20-%20Teach%20for%20Georgia.pdf.
Gutierrez, R. (2017). The need for SySTEMic reform: How the current STEM movement prevents humane mathematics. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX.
Hague, R., Harrop, M., & McCormick, J. (2016). Political science: A comparative introduction. Palgrave Macmillan.
Harriss, J. (2002). Depoliticizing development: The World Bank and social capital. Anthem Press.
Hay, C. (2007). Why we hate politics (Vol. 5). Polity.
Hay, C. (2014). Depoliticisation as process, governance as practice: What did the ‘first wave’ get wrong and do we need a ‘second wave’ to put it right? Policy Politics, 42(2), 293–311.
Hoeg, D., & Bencze, L. (2017). Rising against a gathering storm: A biopolitical analysis of citizenship in STEM policy. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 12(4), 843–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9838-9
Hoppe, R. (2005). Rethinking the science-policy nexus: From knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements. Poiesis & Praxis, 3(3), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10202-005-0074-0
Lemke, J. L. (2005). Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. Taylor & Francis.
Mansfield, K. C., Welton, A. D., & Grogan, M. (2014). “Truth or consequences”: A feminist critical policy analysis of the STEM crisis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1155–1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2014.916006
Matsa, K. E., & Shearer, E. (2018). News use across social media platforms 2018. Retrieved 3 March, 2019, from http://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/.
McCombs, M. (2018). Setting the agenda: Mass media and public opinion. Hoboken: Wiley.
Mishra, N. (2011). Unravelling governance networks in development projects: Depoliticization as an analytical framework. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 2(2), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/097542531100200202
Mitchell, W., & Fazi, T. (2017). Everything you know about neoliberalism is wrong. Social Europe, 20, 1–3.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
Papadopoulos, Y. (2010). Accountability and multi-level governance: More accountability, less democracy? West European Politics, 33(5), 1030–1049. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2010.486126
Papadopoulos, Y. (2017). Multilevel governance and depoliticization. In P. Fawcett, M. Flinders, C. Hay, & M. Wood (Eds.), Anti-Politics, Depoliticization, and Governance (pp. 134–166). Oxford University Press.
Robelen, E. (2012). Georgia fuels STEM education with 'Innovation' grants. Education Week. Retrieved 4 April, 2017, from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2012/09/georgia_gives_stem_ed_a_push_w.html.
Sanders, M. (2008). STEM, STEM Education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-497-0_92
Saltman, K. J. (2015). Failure of corporate school reform. Taylor & Francis.
Salzman, H., Kuehn, D., & Lowell, B. L. (2013). Guestworkers in the high-skill U.S. labor market. Retrieved 3 September, 2017, from http://www.epi.org/publication/bp359-guestworkers-high-skill-labor-market-analysis/.
Satchithananthamoorthy, H. (2015). Networks of power and privilege: A critical discourse analysis of the US Next Generation Science Standards (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)).
Schmitt, C. (2008). The concept of the political: Expanded edition. University of Chicago Press.
Scott, J., Lubienski, C., & DeBray-Pelot, E. (2009). The politics of advocacy in education. Educational Policy, 23(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904808328530
Sharma, A. (2012). Global climate change: What has science education got to do with it? Science & Education, 21(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9372-1
Sharma, A. (2016). STEM-ification of education: The zombie reform strikes again. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.669
Sharma, A., & Buxton, C. (2018). The natural world and science education in the United States. Springer.
Sharma, A. (2020). Phronetic science for wicked times. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 11(2), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.33137/jaste.v11i2.34532
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2016). Theories of democratic network governance. Springer.
STEM Education Coalition. (n.d.). Our purpose. Retrieved 15 March, 2017, from http://www.stemedcoalition.org/about-us/our-purpose/.
Straume, I. S., & Humphrey, J. F. (2011). Depoliticization: The political imaginary of global capitalism. NSU Press.
Taylor, C. (2013). The discourses of climate change climate change and global policy regimes (pp. 17–31). Springer.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering towards utopia: A century of public school reforms. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Van der Meer, T. W., & Thompson, W. (2017). Political trust and the “Crisis of Democracy.” Oxford Research Encyclopedias.
Weinstein, M. (2016). Critiquing and transcending STEM. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 63–72.
Wood, M. (2016). Politicisation, depoliticisation and anti-politics: Towards a multilevel research agenda. Political Studies Review, 14(4), 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/1478-9302.12074
Wood, M., & Flinders, M. (2014). Rethinking depoliticisation: Beyond the governmental. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 151–170. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312X655909
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Lead Editor: Carolina Rodriguez
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sharma, A., Hudson, C. Depoliticization of educational reforms: the STEM story. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 17, 231–249 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10024-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10024-0