This article develops a comprehensive account of the cognitive and methodological foundations of the STEAM approach—Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics—in the specific context of physics education. Drawing on empirical findings from learning sciences, cognitive psychology, and discipline-based physics education research, it articulates how STEAM reframes physics learning as design-centered, representation-rich, inquiry-driven activity that recruits multiple modes of reasoning. Results and Discussion reports on theoretically grounded affordances of STEAM pedagogy: activation of generative processing, reduction and redistribution of cognitive load via multimodal representations, strengthening of conceptual coherence through modeling, and expansion of epistemic agency through design and critique. The article synthesizes methodological principles that make these affordances actionable: iterative modeling, productive failure and scaffolding, explicitly taught multiple representations, assessment aligned with process and product, and teacher professional learning focused on design thinking. The Conclusion maps implications for curriculum design and research, including the need for robust assessment of representational fluency and creativity, attention to equity and inclusion in design tasks, and stronger links between classroom-embedded inquiry and community contexts. The argument demonstrates that a well-specified STEAM approach can preserve the explanatory rigor of physics while expanding the repertoire of meaning-making practices that students use to understand and shape the physical world.  

STEAM, physics education, modeling, multiple representations

Bransford J. D.; Brown A. L.; Cocking R. R. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. — Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000. — 374 p.

Chi M. T. H.; Wylie R. The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes // Educational Psychologist. — 2014. — Vol. 49. — No. 4. — P. 219–243.

Hake R. R. Interactive-Engagement vs Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses // American Journal of Physics. — 1998. — Vol. 66. — No. 1. — P. 64–74.

Hestenes D. Modeling Methodology for Physics Teachers // Eykamp P. (ed.). AIP Conference Proceedings. — 1997. — Vol. 399. — P. 935–957.

Ainsworth S. DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations // Learning and Instruction. — 2006. — Vol. 16. — No. 3. — P. 183–198.

Mayer R. E. Multimedia Learning. — 2-nd ed. — New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. — 320 p.

Sweller J.; Ayres P.; Kalyuga S. Cognitive Load Theory. — New York: Springer, 2011. — 274 p.

Kirschner P. A.; Sweller J.; Clark R. E. Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching // Educational Psychologist. — 2006. — Vol. 41. — No. 2. — P. 75–86.

Freeman S.; Eddy S. L.; McDonough M.; Smith M. K.; Okoroafor N.; Jordt H.; Wenderoth M. P. Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. — 2014. — Vol. 111. — No. 23. — P. 8410–8415.

de Jong T.; van Joolingen W. R. Scientific Discovery Learning with Computer Simulations of Conceptual Domains // Review of Educational Research. — 1998. — Vol. 68. — No. 2. — P. 179–201.

Bybee R. W. The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. — Arlington, VA: NSTA Press, 2013. — 150 p.

Honey M.; Pearson G.; Schweingruber H. (eds.). STEM Integration in K–12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda for Research. — Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2014. — 180 p.

Wieman C. E.; Adams W. K.; Perkins K. K. PhET: Simulations That Enhance Learning // Science. — 2008. — Vol. 322. — No. 5902. — P. 682–683.

Novak J. D.; Cañas A. J. The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct Them. — Pensacola, FL: Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, 2008. — 36 p.

Kolb D. A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. — Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1984. — 256 p.