I initially took the addition of Arts as a matter of inclusivity and for that reason I thought it was an awful idea.

> I feel like this push to include more and more things in the label implies that STEM means "good" and non-STEM means "bad."

I take it that is the impression students are getting, or rather, teachers are assuming that students are getting, and in an attempt to curb any feelings of inferiority, they are making the addition. I think in this case, it is a dangerous precedent. University will cost the engineer as much as it will the liberal arts major, but you are lying if you tell a student that society values them all the same.

I suppose we would need to determine how to measure the value of a given field. Is value determined by impact on society/human civilization, or by job availability and salary. In either case I would argue that STEM fields rank higher, and of course even within STEM, some do far better than others, but suffice it to say, there definitely seems to be an agenda by stretching the definition of a very simple acronym to include fields that are probably being phased out. I seem to recall reading that Japan was no longer going to offer liberal arts in Universities.