research-article

Model-based support for authoring Design-based Learning and Maker Education materials in elementary education

Authors:

Annemiek Veldhuis,

Panos MarkopoulosAuthors Info & Claims

FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2022: 6th FabLearn Europe / MakeEd Conference 2022

Article No.: 3, Pages 1 - 9

https://doi.org/10.1145/3535227.3535230

Published: 17 June 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Design-based Learning (DBL) and Maker Education (ME) are educational approaches that aim to equip students with 21st century skills. As they are not yet widely adopted in the Netherlands, Dutch teachers often develop their own teaching materials. However, these teachers might be unfamiliar with the intricacies of DBL and ME, and they may have trouble setting learning objectives related to the design process or assessing these objectives. In this paper, we explore how a blueprint for DBL and ME curriculum design, based on several curriculum design models, can support elementary school teachers with creating projects for their classroom. We report on the design and implementation of a workshop with three teachers. Based on observation data, workshop artifacts, and post-workshop interviews, we report insights in teachers’ experiences with creating design briefs, setting learning objectives, choosing learning and assessment activities, and further contextual needs related to the implementation of the designed project.

References

[1]

Pieter Appelhof, AMW Bulte, and F Seller. 2008. De initiatie en implementatie van het Technasium. (2008).

[2]

Juan I Asensio-Pérez, Yannis Dimitriadis, Francesca Pozzi, Davinia Hernández-Leo, Luis P Prieto, Donatella Persico, and Sara L Villagrá-Sobrino. 2017. Towards teaching as design: Exploring the interplay between full-lifecycle learning design tooling and teacher professional development. Computers & Education 114 (2017), 92–116.

Digital Library

[3]

Tilde Bekker, Saskia Bakker, Iris Douma, Janneke Van Der Poel, and Koen Scheltenaar. 2015. Teaching children digital literacy through design-based learning with digital toolkits in schools. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 5 (2015), 29–38.

Digital Library

[4]

John Biggs. 1996. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education 32, 3 (1996), 347–364.

[5]

John Biggs and Kevin Collis. 1989. Towards a model of school-based curriculum development and assessment using the SOLO taxonomy. Australian journal of education 33, 2 (1989), 151–163.

[6]

Paulo Blikstein. 2013. Digital fabrication and ‘making’ in education: The democratization of invention. FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors 4, 1 (2013), 1–21.

[7]

Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.

[8]

Kasper Skov Christensen, Mikkel Hjorth, Ole Sejer Iversen, and Paulo Blikstein. 2016. Towards a formal assessment of design literacy: Analyzing K-12 students’ stance towards inquiry. Design Studies 46(2016), 125–151.

[9]

Kasper Skov Christensen, Mikkel Hjorth, Ole Sejer Iversen, and Rachel Charlotte Smith. 2019. Understanding design literacy in middle-school education: Assessing students’ stances towards inquiry. International journal of technology and design education 29, 4(2019), 633–654.

[10]

James Dalziel. 2003. Implementing learning design: The learning activity management system (LAMS). In Interact, integrate, impact : proceedings of the 20th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE).

[11]

Yaron Doppelt. 2009. Assessing creative thinking in design-based learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 19, 1(2009), 55–65.

[12]

Yaron Doppelt, Matthew M Mehalik, Christian D Schunn, Eli Silk, and Denis Krysinski. 2008. Engagement and achievements: A case study of design-based learning in a science context.Journal of technology education 19, 2 (2008), 22–39.

[13]

Iris Douma, Janneke van der Poel, Koen Scheltenaar, and Tilde Bekker. 2016. Maker Education Theory and Practice in the Netherlands White paper for Platform Maker Education Netherlands Maker Education-Theory and Practice in the Netherlands.

[14]

Sonia M Gómez Puente, Michiel van Eijck, and Wim Jochems. 2015. Professional development for design-based learning in engineering education: a case study. European Journal of Engineering Education 40, 1 (2015), 14–31.

[15]

Dave Gray, Sunni Brown, and James Macanufo. 2010. Gamestorming: A playbook for innovators, rulebreakers, and changemakers. ”O’Reilly Media, Inc.”.

[16]

GROOW. 2014. Design based leren met GROOW. https://www.studiotast.com/groow.

[17]

Gwyneth Hughes. 2014. Ipsative assessment: Motivation through marking progress. Springer.

[18]

Ole Sejer Iversen, Rachel Charlotte Smith, Paulo Blikstein, Eva-Sophie Katterfeldt, and Janet C Read. 2016. Digital fabrication in education: Expanding the research towards design and reflective practices. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 5, 1–2(2016), 1–2.

Digital Library

[19]

Soo Jin Jun, Seon Kwan Han, and Soo Hwan Kim. 2017. Effect of design-based learning on improving computational thinking. Behaviour & Information Technology 36, 1 (2017), 43–53.

Digital Library

[20]

Pythagoras Karampiperis and Demetrios Sampson. 2005. Designing learning services for open learning systems utilizing IMS learning design. In Proceedings of the 4 th IASTED International Conference on Web-Based Education (WBE 2005). 21–23.

[21]

Eva-Sophie Katterfeldt, Nadine Dittert, and Heidi Schelhowe. 2015. Designing digital fabrication learning environments for Bildung: Implications from ten years of physical computing workshops. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 5 (2015), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2015.08.001 Digital Fabrication in Education.

[22]

Remke Klapwijk and Niels Burg. 2019. Formative Assessment in Primary Design Education -involving pupils in clarifying the learning goal of divergent thinking.

[23]

David R Krathwohl and Lorin W Anderson. 2009. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

[24]

Tony Lawler. 2009. The use of Cognitive Style Analysis and the APU Design and Technology assessment strategy as means of clarifying and describing student design work. Journal of Design & Technology Education 1, 1 (2009).

[25]

Lee Martin. 2015. The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research 5 (2015), 30–39.

[26]

Judit Martínez Moreno, Patricia Santos, and Davinia Hernandez-Leo. 2021. Maker Education in Primary Education: Changes in Students’ Maker-Mindset and Gender Differences. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 120–125. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/10.1145/3486011.3486431

[27]

Susan McKenney, Nienke Nieveen, and Jan Van den Akker. 2002. Computer support for curriculum developers: CASCADE. Educational technology research and development 50, 4(2002), 25–35.

[28]

Matthew M Mehalik, Yaron Doppelt, and Christian D Schuun. 2008. Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of engineering education 97, 1 (2008), 71–85.

[29]

Dan Nessler. 2018. How to apply a design thinking, HCD, UX or any creative process from scratch. https://medium.com/digital-experience-design/how-to-apply-a-design-thinking-hcd-ux-or-any-creative-process-from-scratch-b8786efbf812

[30]

Carmen L. Padrón, Paloma Díaz, and Ignacio Aedo. 2006. MD2 Method: The Didactic Materials Creation from a Model Based Perspective. In Innovative Approaches for Learning and Knowledge Sharing, Wolfgang Nejdl and Klaus Tochtermann (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 366–382.

[31]

Sonia M. Gómez Puente, Michiel Van Eijck, and Wim Jochems. 2013. Empirical validation of characteristics of design-based learning in higher education. International Journal of Engineering Education 29, 2 (2013), 491–503.

[32]

Rim Razzouk and Valerie Shute. 2012. What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important?Review of Educational Research 82, 3 (2012), 330–348. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23260048

[33]

Jeffrey D Sachs. 2012. From millennium development goals to sustainable development goals. The lancet 379, 9832 (2012), 2206–2211.

[34]

Koen Scheltenaar, Janneke van der Poel, and Tilde Bekker. 2015. Design-based learning in classrooms using playful digital toolkits. In International Conference on Entertainment Computing. Springer, 126–139.

Digital Library

[35]

Michael Scriven. 1966. The Methodology of Evaluation. Number no. 110 in Publication... of the Social Science Education Consortium. Purdue University. https://books.google.ca/books?id=G2f7nAEACAAJ

[36]

Susheela Shanta and John G Wells. 2020. T/E design based learning: assessing student critical thinking and problem solving abilities. International Journal of Technology and Design Education (2020), 1–19.

[37]

SLO. 2020. Overzicht van de kerndoelen voor het primair onderwijs 2006.https://www.slo.nl/sectoren/po/kerndoelen/.

[38]

Rachel Charlotte Smith, Ole Sejer Iversen, and Mikkel Hjorth. 2015. Design Thinking for Digital Fabrication in Education. Int. J. Child-Comp. Interact. 5, C (Sept. 2015), 20–28.

Digital Library

[39]

Kay Stables. 2008. Designing matters; designing minds: The importance of nurturing the designerly in young people. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal 13, 3(2008).

[40]

Kay Stables and Tony Wheeler. 1991. The assessment of performance in design and technology. (1991).

[41]

John Sweller, Paul Ayres, and Slava Kalyuga. 2011. Measuring cognitive load. In Cognitive load theory. Springer, 71–85.

[42]

Ruurd Taconis, Tilde Bekker, Saskia Bakker, and Anika an der Sande. 2018. Developing the Teach21 Online Authoring Tool. In CSEDU (1). 91–98.

[43]

Ruurd Taconis, Herwich Hobbelen, and Tilde Bekker. 2021. A model-based online tool supporting the design of Challenge Based Learning. 49th SEFI Annual Conference 2021 : Blended Learning in Engineering Education: challenging, enlightening – and lasting?

[44]

Annette Thijs, Petra Fisser, and Monique van der Hoeven. 2014. 21e eeuwse vaardigheden in het curriculum van het funderend onderwijs. (2014).

[45]

Annemiek Van Boeijen, Jaap Daalhuizen, Roos van der Schoor, and Jelle Zijlstra. 2014. Delft design guide: Design strategies and methods.

[46]

Jan van den Akker. 2004. Curriculum perspectives: An introduction. In Curriculum landscapes and trends. Springer, 1–10.

[47]

Arjan van der Meij. 2016. Maker Education in Nederland. https://makered.nl/

[48]

Annemiek Veldhuis, Bernice d’Anjou, Tilde Bekker, Ioanna Garefi, Panagiota Digkoglou, Georgia Safouri, Silvia Remotti, Emer Beamer Cronin, and Madalina Bouros. 2021. The Connected Qualities of Design Thinking and Maker Education Practices in Early Education: A Narrative Review. In FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2021 - An International Conference on Computing, Design and Making in Education (St. Gallen, Switzerland) (FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3466725.3466729

Digital Library

[49]

Teri Wagner and Katherine Cennamo. 2017. Benefits and Challenges of Design-Based Learning in a Middle School Classroom. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 1086–1092.

[50]

Disi Wang, Mohammed Samaka, Yongwu Miao, Zeyad Ali, and H Ulrich Hoppe. 2016. A model-driven PBL application to support the authoring, delivery, and execution of PBL processes. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 11, 1 (2016), 1–24.

[51]

John G Wells. 2019. STEM education: The potential of technology education. Council on Technology and Engineering Teacher Education.

[52]

Di Xiao, Tilde Bekker, Panos Markopoulos, and Emer Beamer. 2020. Challenges and Strategies for Teachers Learning and Facilitating Based on DBL. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 146–149. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/10.1145/3386201.3386211

Cited By

Xiao DBekker TMarkopoulos PSkovbjerg H(2024)Requirements and challenges for implementing Design-based learning in kindergarten—— A case study in ChinaProceedings of the Tenth International Symposium of Chinese CHI10.1145/3565698.3565766(15-26)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3565698.3565766

Recommendations

Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and teaching

We report a research project with a purpose of helping teachers learn how to design and implement science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) lessons using robotics. Specifically, pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and ...
The WebQuest model effects on mathematics curriculum learning in elementary school students

Since its inception in 1995, the WebQuest instructional model has received substantial attention from educators who have applied it to teaching activities. However, WebQuest has seldom been applied to mathematical teaching. Therefore, exploring ...
The study on integrating WebQuest with mobile learning for environmental education

This study is to demonstrate the impact of different teaching strategies on the learning performance of environmental education using quantitative methods. Students learned about resource recycling and classification through an instructional website ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2022: 6th FabLearn Europe / MakeEd Conference 2022

May 2022

117 pages

ISBN:9781450396332

DOI:10.1145/3535227

Copyright © 2022 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 June 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Funding Sources

Erasmus+

Conference

FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2022

FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2022: FabLearn Europe / MakeEd 2022 - An International Conference on Computing, Design and Making in Education

May 30 - 31, 2022

Copenhagen, Denmark

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 14 of 35 submissions, 40%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
82
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)36
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 20 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Xiao DBekker TMarkopoulos PSkovbjerg H(2024)Requirements and challenges for implementing Design-based learning in kindergarten—— A case study in ChinaProceedings of the Tenth International Symposium of Chinese CHI10.1145/3565698.3565766(15-26)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3565698.3565766

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents