Over the past decade, the maker movement and in its slipstream maker education have attained worldwide popularity among educators, politicians, and the media. Makers’ enthusiasm for creative design and construction, using old and new tools has proven contagious, and is worth exploration and critical reflection by the community of engineering and technology education (ETE). This chapter describes what has been said about “making” by philosophers and educators; what maker education is, and what is new and not so new about it; why it has gained momentum; what the evidence is about its effectiveness and its possible weaknesses; and how mainstream technology education may benefit from maker education. This chapter concludes with ideas for a research agenda.
LINK
Maker spaces are generally regarded as a valuable innovation in comparison to traditional education, although it is largely unclear what is exactly learned. This deficiency hampers the deployment of maker spaces, particularly their embedding and integration in the existing practice in formal education. In the work presented here, we explore the possibility of having learners self-report on their learning experience. For this purpose, we developed an easy-to-use visual tool for assessing learning of 21st Century Skills in children’s maker space activities, the Self-Evaluation Tool (SET). Particularly, we investigated the validation of the SET for the self-evaluation of learning activities in the maker space and how children evaluate their own performance in the various domains. The results show higher scores on learning goals in subjectification and lower scores for socialization. Future research will focus on a comparison of the different types of maker programs.
DOCUMENT
The maker movement is increasingly finding its way into informal and formal educational settings. This chapter welcomes that trend and reflects on the cases in this book through five lenses, whereby informal and formal settings are contrasted. The first lens focuses on the development of a maker identity. In the formal setting in Delft (The Netherlands), for instance, students are expected to develop a professional engineering identity, which calls for certain task characteristics and a learning environment that differs from informal settings. The second lens focuses on what in being learnt: maker skills can be a learning objective in itself but making can also be a vehicle to learn other things. The third lens is about ‘what drives learners, what is motivating?’ The fourth lens is concerned with the value of working with tangible objects, and the use of different types of materials. Lastly, ways to sustain ‘making in education’, for instance by means of collaboration between learners, teachers and stakeholders is a lens that is used to shed light on contrasts between formal and informal settings.
DOCUMENT
Maker education offers opportunities to stimulate the creativity of young people in various types of education. How to guide these learning processes, however, is an unexplored area for the supervisors (teachers and librarians). In the research-project presented, a professional learning community of librarians, teacher-researchers and maker educators investigates the pedagogy of ‘making’. The learning community consisted of twelve makerspace-coaches, three maker educators and three researchers. The interventions for enhancing creativity that were developed varied from redesign of the tasks to new forms of guiding students. It was noticed that the children came up with new ideas and were motivated to push out their frontiers. Furthermore, the coaches experienced that children’s creativity is not always visible in the final products of their making process, but rather in the process of making. The learning community turned out to be a fruitful approach for professionalization of makerspace-coaches.
MULTIFILE
Innovation is crucial for higher education to ensure high-quality curricula that address the changing needs of students, labor markets, and society as a whole. Substantial amounts of resources and enthusiasm are devoted to innovations, but often they do not yield the desired changes. This may be due to unworkable goals, too much complexity, and a lack of resources to institutionalize the innovation. In many cases, innovations end up being less sustainable than expected or hoped for. In the long term, the disappointing revenues of innovations hamper the ability of higher education to remain future proof. Against the background of this need to increase the success of educational innovations, our colleague Klaartje van Genugten has explored the literature on innovations to reveal mechanisms that contribute to the sustainability of innovations. Her findings are synthesized in this report. They are particularly meaningful for directors of education programs, curriculum committees, educational consultants, and policy makers, who are generally in charge of defining the scope and set up of innovations. Her report offers a comprehensive view and provides food for thought on how we can strive for future-proof and sustainable innovations. I therefore recommend reading this report.
DOCUMENT
Learning activities in a makerspace are hands-on and characterized by design and inquiry. Evaluation is needed both for learners and their coaches in order to effectively guide the learning process of the children and for feedback on the effectiveness of the after-school maker activities. Due to its constructionist nature, learning in a makerspace requires specific forms of evaluation. In this paper we describe the development of an instrument that facilitates and captures reflection on the activities that children undertook in a library makerspace. Our aim is to capture learning in this context with multiple instruments: analysis of the artifacts that are made, observation of hands-on activities and interviews - which all are time consuming methods. Hence, we developed an easy to use tool for self-evaluation of maker learner activities for children. We build on the design of a visual instrument used for learning by design and inquiry in primary education. The findings and results are transferable to (formative) assessment and evaluation of learning activities by learners in other types of education and specific in maker education.
DOCUMENT
The learning innovation we report in this article is an international rapid-prototyping event (48 hours) in which teams of international BSc and MSc students from two universities (Western Europe and South-East Africa, respectively) jointly designed and developed a prototype for a local small-business owner in a developing economy. The learning innovation has its origin in the simple observation that the majority of the current theories, cases, and learning activities that characterize entrepreneurship education have their origin in western-oriented epistemologies and ontologies. The goal of this entrepreneurial learning activity was to develop students’ entrepreneurial competencies through interaction and cross-boundary entrepreneurial problem-solving between university students from western and non-western origin. The results underpin that it is very worthwhile for higher education teachers—who look for new, cost-effective “wide” entrepreneurship education programs—to adopt such events. The results show that the program not only contributes to short-term impact (e.g., joy of learning and collaborating, confidence in the own expertise, and seeing where to contribute) but also enables longer term impact (e.g., moving from intention to an actual start-up). Moreover, the activity produces actual solutions that, in this case the cheese maker can implement, can help the business to grow and survive.
DOCUMENT
Building on the Millennium Development Goals, Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) and Education for Sustainable Development Goals (ESDG) were established. Despite the willingness of many educational institutions worldwide to embrace the SDGs, given escalating sustainability challenges, this article questions whether ESDG is desirable as “an education for the future”. Many challenges outlined by the SDGs are supposed to be solved by “inclusive” or “sustainable” economic growth, assuming that economic growth can be conveniently decoupled from resource consumption. Yet, the current hegemony of the sustainability-through-growth paradigm has actually increased inequalities and pressure on natural resources, exacerbating biodiversity loss, climate change and resulting social tensions. With unreflective support for growth, far from challenging the status quo, the SDGs and consequently, the ESDGs, condone continuing environmental exploitation, depriving millions of species of their right to flourish, and impoverishing future generations. This article creates greater awareness of the paradoxes of sustainable development and encourages teaching for sustainability through various examples of alternative education that emphasizes planetary ethic and degrowth. The alternatives include Indigenous learning, ecopedagogy, ecocentric education, education for steady-state and circular economy, empowerment and liberation. “This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in 'Journal of Environmental Education' on 01/20/20, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00958964.2019.1710444 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
This book provides insight into an ambitious project to re-invent the educational method practiced at NHL Stenden. The predecessors used different approaches to the delivery of education. One of them used Competency-Based Education, whilst the other practiced Problem-Based Learning. The choice to combine the advantages of both methods, as well as to develop an entirely new concept that provided a better response to the fast and ever-increasing pace of changes in the workplace, was made by both institutions together. This approach was called Design-Based Education (DBE). Given the significant changes required of stakeholders to facilitate learning according to the new DBE approach, it is important to take stock of what these changes mean in terms of teaching and learning and to ascertain from early steps how everybody can stay, or step, on board.
DOCUMENT
The pace of introduction of new technology and thus continuous change in skill needs at workplaces, especially for the engineers, has increased. While digitization induced changes in manufacturing, construction and supply chain sectors may not be felt the same in every sector, this will be hard to escape. Both young and experienced engineers will experience the change, and the need to continuously assess and close the skills gap will arise. How will we, the continuing engineering educators and administrators will respond to it? Prepared for engineering educators and administrators, this workshop will shed light on the future of continuing engineering education as we go through exponentially shortened time frames of technological revolution and in very recent time, in an unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. S. Chakrabarti, P. Caratozzolo, E. Sjoer and B. Norgaard.
DOCUMENT
