Making in the classroom: Longitudinal evidence of increases in self-efficacy and STEM possible selves over time
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Innovative teaching strategies incorporating hands-on and applied learning experiences are beneficial for fostering STEM identities and increasing self-efficacy.
“The application of innovative teaching strategies (as Design Thinking and Making) incorporating hands-on and applied learning experiences has been identified as beneficial for fostering STEM identities (Reinking & Martin, 2018) and increasing self-efficacy (Schlegel et al., 2019).”
From Fostering students’ motivation and self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, and design through design thinking and making in project-based learning: a gender-perspective study in primary education (2025) · cites this paper as Schlegel et al., 2019
Schlegel et al. (2019) found significant increases in four of eight variables: Making self-efficacy, science self-efficacy, science identity, and STEM possible selves.
“The study found significant increases in four of the eight variables: Making self-efficacy, science self-efficacy, science identity, and STEM possible selves.”
From Fostering students’ motivation and self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, and design through design thinking and making in project-based learning: a gender-perspective study in primary education (2025) · cites this paper as Schlegel et al. (2019)
Curriculum-aligned Making activities can effectively foster self-efficacy and identity in both Making and science.
“These findings suggest that curriculum-aligned Making activities can effectively foster self-efficacy and identity in both Making and science.”
From Fostering students’ motivation and self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, and design through design thinking and making in project-based learning: a gender-perspective study in primary education (2025) · cites this paper as Schlegel et al. (2019)
Schlegel et al. (2019) found no significant changes in Making interest, science interest, Maker identity, or STEM career interest.
“However, there were no significant changes in Making interest, science interest, Maker identity, or STEM career interest.”
From Fostering students’ motivation and self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, and design through design thinking and making in project-based learning: a gender-perspective study in primary education (2025) · cites this paper as Schlegel et al. (2019)
Cites
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666 · see citing works
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.41.9.954 · Cited by 5,806 · see citing works
Self-Efficacy and Academic Motivation
Schunk, D. H. (1991) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133 · Cited by 4,292 · see citing works
Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586 · Cited by 2,675 · see citing works
Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.188 · Cited by 852 · see citing works
Taylor, G., Jungert, T., Mageau, G. A., Schattke, K., Dedic, H., Rosenfield, S., & Koestner, R. (2014) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.08.002 · Cited by 816 · see citing works
Chu, S. L., Quek, F., Bhangaonkar, S., Ging, A. B., & Sridharamurthy, K. (2015) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2015.08.002 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Assessing learning in technology-rich maker activities: A systematic review of empirical research
Lin, Q., Yin, Y., Tang, X., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103944 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Santos, P., El Aadmi, K., Calvera-Isabal, M., & Rodríguez, A. (2025) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-025-10001-6 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“The application of innovative teaching strategies (as Design Thinking and Making) incorporating hands-on and applied learning experiences has been identified as beneficial for fostering STEM identities (Reinking & Martin, 2018) and increasing self-efficacy (Schlegel et al., 2019).”
- Authors
- Schlegel, R. J., Chu, S. L., Chen, K., Deuermeyer, E., Christy, A. G., & Quek, F.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Schlegel, Rebecca J.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-12
- Volume
- 142
- Pages
- 103637
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2963220664
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8
- FWCI
- 8.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
- Keywords
- making, maker culture, makerspaces, self-efficacy, science identity, science interest, STEM career interest, underrepresented groups in STEM, elementary school students, hands-on learning, curriculum integration, longitudinal effects
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
