In the literature, there are multiple definitions of integrated STEM education, resulting in ambiguity and uncertainty of application. A firm conception of integrated STEM education is needed to determine its content, procedures and epistemological knowledge, the latter being the focus of this article. While epistemological accounts exist for its several disciplines, an integrated STEM epistemology has not yet emerged. This article provides a comparative analysis of modeling and argumentation in mathematics, science, and engineering and notes the observed similarities, intersections, and differences of their practice in these fields. Emphasis is given to the differences, which have not been elaborated in current literature although their importance has been noted. In this context, we examine definitions and functions of models and arguments in science and mathematics. The difference in argumentation concerns mainly the validation of knowledge; in models, the differences pertain to their constitution and intended aim. We also describe mathematical modeling, which optimally illustrates the interplay and collaboration of mathematics and science and permits comparison of their respective practices. The article contributes to the issue of the interrelated diversity of STEM practices and the intellectual and pragmatic educational benefits this issue confers.

中文翻译：

---

比较 STEM 学科中的交叉实践

文献中对综合STEM教育有多种定义，导致应用的模糊性和不确定性。综合STEM教育的内容、程序和认识论知识需要对综合STEM教育有一个坚定的概念，后者是本文的重点。尽管存在针对其多个学科的认识论解释，但尚未出现综合的 STEM 认识论。本文对数学、科学和工程中的建模和论证进行了比较分析，并指出了他们在这些领域的实践中观察到的相似之处、交叉点和差异。强调了差异，尽管它们的重要性已被注意到，但在当前文献中并未详细说明。在这种情况下，我们研究科学和数学中模型和论证的定义和功能。论证的差异主要涉及知识的验证；在模型中，差异与它们的构成和预期目标有关。我们还描述了数学建模，它最佳地说明了数学和科学的相互作用和协作，并允许比较它们各自的实践。这篇文章有助于解决 STEM 实践相互关联的多样性问题，以及该问题赋予的智力和实用教育益处。它最佳地说明了数学和科学的相互作用和协作，并允许比较它们各自的实践。这篇文章有助于解决 STEM 实践相互关联的多样性问题，以及该问题赋予的智力和实用教育益处。它最佳地说明了数学和科学的相互作用和协作，并允许比较它们各自的实践。这篇文章有助于解决 STEM 实践相互关联的多样性问题，以及该问题赋予的智力和实用教育益处。