Makerspaces pedagogy – supports and constraints during 3D design and 3D printing activities in primary schools

ABSTRACT

Makerspaces have been heralded as an effective way to support the development of 21st Century and STEM capabilities, yet there is a paucity of systematic, multiple-case analysis to guide educator and researcher practice. This collective case study examined 24 primary school classroom contexts to understand what supports and constrains learning and teaching in technology-oriented makerspaces. Thematic analysis of 24 teacher in-situ reflective journals and focus group interviews of all teacher participants revealed 19 supports and 11 constraints, relating to pedagogy, task design, learner attributes, technological factors, the school environment, and teacher capabilities and beliefs. These were used to form an evidence-based framework for learning and teaching in makerspaces. Findings are discussed in relation to previous research which has tended to be anecdotal and based on single cases. Implications for future teaching, research and policy initiatives are also detailed.

KEYWORDS:

• makerspaces
• 3D Printing
• 3D Design
• primary
• K-2
• pedagogy
• learning design
• framework

Acknowledgments

Approval for undertaking this study was granted by both the researchers’ University Ethics Committee, and the NSW Department of Education. This study was funded in part by an AusIndustry Innovation Connections Grant, the NSW Department of Education, and Makers Empire. The University ethics process adheres with the Australian National Statement on the Ethical Conduct of Human Research 2007 updated 2018, which requires independent and unbiased analysis and reporting of research results. None of the research team involved in this study have any financial interest in the technology platforms used in this study.Reliability and validity of findings are reinforced by reporting of primary data. Refer to http://primarymakers.com for a full report on this study, including samples of primary data and extended analysis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.