In the 1990s, educators yearned for a better word to illustrate the relationship between four crucial subject areas: science, mathematics, engineering and technology.
Meanwhile, they balked at “SMET,” the acronym in use at the time.
“People thought it sounded too much like ‘smut,’ so we changed it to STEM,” said Richard Tapia (NMS 2011) and member of the National Science Board when the new term was coined.

Dr. Tapia receiving the 2011 National Medal of Science from President Barack Obama
To say it caught on would be an understatement.
What started as a catchy abbreviation evolved into a movement that mobilized a nation to address its global competitiveness.
It’s the reason students returning to school this month will benefit from more engaging curriculum, new standards for teaching, and opportunities that their parents, who graduated decades earlier, couldn’t have imagined.
But these changes – which also pose new challenges for educators – didn’t happen overnight.
They began, some say, in 1957 after the Soviets launched Sputnik, the first artificial satellite sent from Earth.
For the first time, America – and its global dominance as an innovative power player – felt threatened.
As the so-called “space race” ensued, President Dwight D. Eisenhower called the nation to action:
“We need scientists in the ten years ahead,” he said. “They say we need them by thousands more than we are now presently planning to have.”
Academia got to work, producing a record 80,000 graduates per year in engineering by the mid-1980s, according to the Engineering Workforce Commission.
This surge – while promising – wasn’t sustainable long-term, said Bruce Alberts, a biochemist who won the National Medal of Science in 2012 for, in part, improving science education.
Decades ago, he explained, STEM subjects were taught at breakneck speed. Teachers, resorting to the standard lecture, covered as many topics as possible in a short time period.
This, Alberts said, proved to be a major flaw.