Blog 6 - Task 2 - Using constructionism and the maker movement as a core to education.

Constructionism is a theory that builds on the idea that we learn best when we are given engaging opportunities to do hands-on activities and to build things that are meaningful to us. The much-related maker movement also highlights the importance of hands-on learning and using any tools around you to create meaningful DIY (do it yourself) projects (Floridi, 2011). Both ideas have a high focus on ensuring people get to explore, create, try, and most importantly, give room for people to learn that failing can be good. This is something a traditional school often does not give a lot of room for when any test you make is graded and a failure is seen as something bad rather than another learning opportunity. If implemented correctly, these meaningful learning-by-doing opportunities can promote creativity, problem-solving skills, and innovation (Hewett et al., 2020).

The original idea of constructionism was created before the modern digital era and as such it originally focused on ensuring learners used physical material that they had around them to create objects such as art, clothes, and tangible functional objects rather than simply talking about creating something (Byrne et al., 2021). Today we have digital tools that can take this one step further and allow for another way of looking at creating objects. One such tool is Tinkercad.

Tinkercad is a web-based 3D-modelling tool that allows students to create digital objects in a user-friendly interface for free. Users are given plenty of easy-to-use tools to create 3D models, digital circuits, and simple coding. If combined with a 3D printer, the user can print out objects such

(Original author and group work content made using Tinkercad and a 3D printer)

as the name tag in the photo above.

In STEAM learning, students can create parts that they later can attach with circuits to create moving objects (see video below), in Creative arts students can design, print, and build their personalised costumes, and in History, users can create monuments and then use code to see the object move and come to life.

(Video made by Damien Kee, link to video HERE)

Although there are many creative aspects and potentials to Tinkercad there are some limitations and the main ones are the steep learning curve and the lack of continued physical feedback (Ng et al., 2021). Teachers need to be aware that although Tinkercad is relatively easy to use compared to other 3D tools, some students may not feel engaged as it can become overwhelming and as a result, they may not find it meaningful. The lack of continued physical feedback, which is something that is at its core to both constructionism and the maker movement may make digital ICT tools not as meaningful as something physical would (Byrne et al., 2021). I am a huge fan of the maker movement and constructionism and love implementing hands-on tasks where students work with physical objects from scratch such as dissections, carving objects to add to circuit boards, and constructing buildings etc. I still struggle to see the same deep meaning with 3D objects as fully physical objects will do and am not convinced if I will use 3D design in my future lessons (Wong & Cheung, 2020).

Is it fun, yes! Do I think it is great for deep learning, maybe, I need to work with it more to be convinced.

References

Byrne, J. R., Girvan, C., & Clayson, J. (2021). Constructionism moving forward. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(3), 965–968. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13094

Floridi, L. (2011). A defence of constructionism: philosophy as conceptual engineering. Metaphilosophy, 42(3), 282–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2011.01693.x

Hewett, K. J. E., Zeng, G., & Pletcher, B. C. (2020). The Acquisition of 21st-Century Skills Through Video Games: Minecraft Design Process Models and Their Web of Class Roles. Simulation & Gaming, 51(3), 336–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120904976

Ng, O. L., Liu, M., & Cui, Z. (2021). Students’ in-moment challenges and developing maker perspectives during problem-based digital making. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1967817

Wong, G. K. W., & Cheung, H. Y. (2020). Exploring children’s perceptions of developing twenty-first century skills through computational thinking and programming. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1534245