By design: Professional learning ecologies to develop primary school teachers' makerspaces pedagogical capabilities
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Makerspaces embody a growing movement of educators promoting constructionist learning with physical materials and digital technologies such as 3D design and 3D printing. As it gains traction in K‐12 settings, the maker movement represents an interesting context in which to explore how professional ecologies can equip teachers with the knowledge, skills and dispositions needed to implement twenty‐first century learning in their school context. This study investigated the roles of different participants from industry, school leadership and colleagues in influencing teachers’ confidence, enthusiasm, capabilities and beliefs when teaching in makerspaces. Utilising triangulated observations of activities through online questionnaires at beginning, middle and end points, as well as postproject interviews, the study explored the participation of 27 primary school teachers in a blended professional learning programme, followed by classroom delivery of modules focusing on tablet‐based 3D design applications and the use of newly instaled 3D printers. Reporting no prior knowledge or experience with makerspaces, quantitative analyses revealed significant increases in teachers’ confidence and enthusiasm. Qualitative analyses of questionnaire and interview data underscored the influence of hands‐on and theoretically grounded professional learning providing practical exposure to constructionist ideas, design thinking methodologies and 3D design technologies. Findings reveal the importance of targeted professional learning coupled with a substantial collegially supported implementation phase, as well as support from school leaders and industry partners to promote meaningful pedagogical change in technology‐mediated maker‐based learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
- Findingown data§ Research par�cipants
All teachers in the study reported having no prior knowledge of or experience teaching in makerspaces.
“All teachers reported having no prior knowledge of, or experience teaching in, makerspaces.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Theme 3: Concerns Moving Forward Following the Professional Development Phase
Five teachers (18.5%) described school-based IT support as both a current inadequacy and a future need.
“Five teachers (18.5%) described schoolbased IT support as both a current inadequacy and a future need.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Theme 3: Concerns Moving Forward Following the Professional Development Phase
Three teachers (11.1%) had concerns about the infrastructure in their schools.
“Three teachers (11.1%) had concerns about the infrastructure in their schools.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Theme 3: Concerns Moving Forward Following the Professional Development Phase
Twelve teachers (44.4%) expressed resources and infrastructure concerns.
“Twelve teachers (44.4%) expressed resources and infrastructure concerns.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Confidence and enthusiasm across the program
Post-professional learning confidence (M=4.4, SD=0.8) was significantly different from pre-professional learning confidence (M=3.04, SD=1.16).
“the mean score for post-professional learning confidence (M=4.4,SD=0.8) was significantly different to the pre-professional learning score (M=3.04,SD=1.16)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data§ Confidence and enthusiasm across the program
Post-professional learning enthusiasm (M=4.78, SD=1.16) was not significantly different from pre-professional learning enthusiasm (M=5.22, SD=0.75).
“the mean score for postprofessional learning enthusiasm (M=4.78,SD=1.16) was not significantly different to the preprofessional learning score (M=5.22,SD=0.75)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Confidence and enthusiasm across the program
Levels of enthusiasm were significantly affected by the stage of the study (V = 0.36, F(2, 25) = 6.94, p < .004).
“levels of enthusiasm were also affected by the stage of study, V = 0.36, F(2, 25) = 6.94, p < .004.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Theme 3: Concerns Moving Forward Following the Professional Development Phase
Six teachers (22.2%) referenced problems with technology as a concern moving forward, including broader technology issues within the school and those likely to be encountered while teaching their units.
“Six teachers (22.2%) referenced problems with technology as a concern they had moving forward, including broader technology issues within the school and those they perceived were likely to be encountered while teaching their units.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Post-Implementa�on Percep�ons of Teachers
Thirteen teachers (52%) volunteered that they had become more flexible, inquiry-oriented and student-centred in their teaching.
“Thirteen (52%) volunteered that they had become more flexible, inquiry-oriented and student-centred in their teaching”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Confidence and enthusiasm across the program
Levels of confidence were significantly affected by the stage of the study (V = 0.73, F(2, 25) = 33.33, p < .001).
“Levels of confidence were significantly affected by the stage of the study, V = 0.73, F(2, 25) = 33.33,p < .001”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ Professional Development Program Ac�vi�es
More experienced teachers deemed the online professional development support to be more valuable.
“This suggests that more experienced teachers deemed the online professional development support to be more valuable.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 3
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoning§ Limita�onsGiven the self-selected nature of the sample, findings might differ with a larger sample including teachers less willing to engage in professional learning and/or teach in makerspaces.
“given the self-selected nature of the sample, it is possible that findings would differ with a larger sample including teachers less willing to engage in professional learning and/or teach in makerspaces.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown data§ Limita�onsNo evidence was found that could directly associate professional learning effects to individual schools.
“there was no evidence found that could directly associate professional learning effects to individual schools.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone given§ Ethics, Conflicts of Interest and Open DataApproval for undertaking this study was granted by both the researchers' university Ethics Committee.
“Approval for undertaking this study was granted by both the researchers' university Ethics Commitee,”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentt(25) = 3.72reported p = .001 · recomputed p = .001
“t(25)=3.72,p = .001”
- ConsistentF(2, 25) = 33.33reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(2, 25) = 33.33,p < .001”
- ConsistentF(2, 25) = 6.94reported p < .004 · recomputed p = .004
“F(2, 25) = 6.94, p < .004”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Incorrect percentage for five teachers concerned about time
MinorFive of the 27 survey respondents represent 18.5%, not 14.8%.
Reported 14.8 · recomputed 18.518519
“Time was s�ll a concern, but only for a minority of teachers (5, 14.8%).”
Incorrect percentage for five teachers reporting confidence gains
MinorThe post-implementation survey had 27 respondents, so five teachers represent 18.5%, not 32%.
Reported 32 · recomputed 18.518519
“Five (32%) iden�fied how improvements to their confidence impacted on student learning.”
Conflicting counts of earlier resourcing concerns
MinorThe account of the post-professional-development survey gives 12 teachers with resources and infrastructure concerns, while the later comparison gives eight for resourcing issues in that survey.
“Twelve teachers (44.4%) expressed resources and infrastructure concerns.”
“More commented on resourcing issues in the post-implementa�on survey (n=17, 63%) than in the post professional-development survey (n=8, 30%)”
Conflicting interview participant counts
MinorThe methods state that 25 teachers joined the focus group interviews, but the findings refer to 24 interview participants.
“25 teachers par�cipated in the focus group interviews.”
“Of the 24 teachers who par�cipated in the interviews, all indicated that they would like to integrate another makerspaces unit into their classes in future.”
Cites
Desimone, L. M. (2009) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x08331140 · Cited by 4,862 · see citing works
Vescio, V. A., Ross, D. D., & Adams, A. (2007) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004 · Cited by 2,459 · see citing works
Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning
Webster-Wright, A. (2009) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654308330970 · Cited by 1,174 · see citing works
Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective
Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312040004807 · Cited by 947 · see citing works
Kopcha, T. J. (2012) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014 · Cited by 569 · see citing works
Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2007) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.017 · Cited by 489 · see citing works
Empirical studies on the Maker Movement, a promising approach to learning: A literature review
Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2017) · Entertainment Computing · doi:10.1016/j.entcom.2016.09.002 · Cited by 317 · see citing works
(2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203108352 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
The promise and the promises of Making in science education
Bevan, B. (2017) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2017 K-12 Edition
Freeman, A., Becker, S. A., & Cummins, M. R. (2017) · Cited by 219 · see citing works
Horizon Report - 2017 Higher Education Edition
Jaramillo, S. G. (2017) · Cuaderno activa · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Effects of a Play Program on Creative Thinking of Preschool Children
Garaigordobil, M., & Berrueco, L. (2011) · The Spanish Journal of Psychology · doi:10.5209/rev_sjop.2011.v14.n2.9 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Moving education into the digital age: the contribution of teachers' professional development
Twining, P., Raffaghelli, J. E., Albion, P., & Knezek, D. (2013) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12031 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Cremin, T., Glauert, E., Craft, A., Compton, A., & Stylianidou, F. (2015) · Education 3-13 · doi:10.1080/03004279.2015.1020655 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Oliver, K. M. (2016) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0028-5 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Makerspaces in the early years: A literature review
(2017) · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Observing young children's creative thinking: engagement, involvement and persistence
Robson, S., & Rowe, V. (2012) · International Journal of Early Years Education · doi:10.1080/09669760.2012.743098 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Making Learners: A Framework for Evaluating Making in STEM Education
Marshall, J. A., & Harron, J. (2018) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning · doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1749 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Spacemakers: A Leadership Perspective on Curriculum and the Purpose of K–12 Educational Makerspaces
Harron, J., & Hughes, J. E. (2018) · Journal of Research on Technology in Education · doi:10.1080/15391523.2018.1461038 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
The makerspace experience and teacher professional development
Paganelli, A. L., Cribbs, J., Huang, X., Pereira, N., Huss, J. M., Chandler, W. G., & Paganelli, A. (2016) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2016.1166448 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Refocusing mobile makerspace outreach efforts internally as professional development
Purpur, E., Radniecki, T., Colegrove, T., et al. (2016) · Library Hi Tech · doi:10.1108/lht-07-2015-0077 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Mouza, C. (2006) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/2218-567j-65p8-7j72 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Constructive Technology as the Key to Entering the Community of Learners
Stager, G. S. (2005) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
The Early Years: Integrating Design
Ashbrook, P., & Nellor, S. (2015) · Science and Children · doi:10.2505/4/sc15_053_01_24 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Bolstad R., 2006, Zooming in on learning in the digital age (ZILDA): Report 1
- Bower M., 2018, ImpaCT, 93
- Burnette C., 2005, IDESiGN
- Fierst K., 2011, Design thinking for educators
- Hasso Plattner Institute of Design, 2017, A virtual crash course in design thinking
- NESA, 2018, Science and Technology Syllabus K‐6
- Papert S., 1986, Constructionism: A new opportunity for elementary science education
- Papert S., 1991, Situating constructionism
- Resnick M., 2014, Constructionism and creativity: Proceedings of the Third International Constructionism Conference, 13
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reasons associated with preservice teachers’ intention to use immersive virtual reality in education
Bower, M., DeWitt, D., & Lai, J. W. M. (2020) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13009 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Self-citationInquiring tweets want to know: #Edchat supports for #RemoteTeaching during COVID‐19
Greenhow, C., Staudt Willet, K. B., & Galvin, S. (2021) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13097 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
“Because #Edchat is embedded in teachers’ broader PLN, contributing in a distinct way (Stevenson et al., 2019), future research should explore how components of a teacher's professional learning network flex, adapt and inform each other (Peters & Romero, 2019).”
BackgroundCalavia, M. B., Blanco, T., Casas, R., & Gracia, B. D. (2022) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101199 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
“Several investigations have introduced design-based pedagogies in training teachers (Elwood et al., 2016; Henriksen et al., 2017; Hern ´ andez-Leo et al., 2017; Jordan, 2016; Kali & Ronen-Fuhrmann, 2011; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
Bhandari, A. (2022) · Journal of the Knowledge Economy · doi:10.1007/s13132-022-00920-3 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
A tale of two subreddits: Change and continuity in teaching‐related online spaces
Willet, K. B. S., & Carpenter, J. P. (2020) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13051 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Learning by making: A framework to revisit practices in a constructionist learning environment
Morado, M. F., Melo, A. E., & Jarman, A. (2021) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13083 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Young children’s design thinking skills in makerspaces
Hatzigianni, M., Stevenson, M., Falloon, G., Bower, M., & Forbes, A. (2020) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100216 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationCarpenter, J. P., & Willet, K. B. S. (2021) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103371 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Liu, S., & Li, C. (2023) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101335 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Teachers’ perceptions of a maker-centered professional development experience: a multiple case study
Jones, W. M. (2020) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-020-09581-2 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
A Systematic Review of the Literature on Maker Education and Teacher Training
Quintana-Ordorika, A., Ruíz, U. G., & Portillo, J. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14121310 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Zheng, W., Zheng, X., & Zhu, X. (2023) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.06.072 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Online Teacher Professional Development: A Research Synthesis on Effectiveness and Evaluation
Stavermann, K. (2024) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-024-09792-9 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Stevenson et al. (2019) found a limited degree of improved teaching practice.”
InfluentialChen, Y., & Cao, L. (2022) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13183 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Understanding the educators’ practices in makerspaces for the design of education tools
Turakhia, D. G., Ludgin, D., Mueller, S., et al. (2023) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-023-10305-1 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
“A review of the literature on educators in makerspaces reveals that much of this work is focused on teacher training and professional development rather than educators’ experiences teaching (Stevenson et al., 2019; Oliver, 2016).”
Xu, W. M., Chen, J.-C., Lou, Y.-F., & Chen, H. (2023) · International Journal of Technology and Design Education · doi:10.1007/s10798-023-09810-4 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“The curricular application of design thinking in maker education is not comprehensive, meaning that improvements in learners’ divergent thinking and innovation abilities cannot be maxim-ised (Bennetts et al., 2017; Ercan et al., 2016; Levine et al., 2016; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
InfluentialFacilitating innovation with technology: Key actors in educational ecosystems
Gu, X., Crook, C. K., & Spector, M. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12786 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
“The study by Stevenson, Bower, Falloon, Forbes, and Hatzigianni (2019) reminds us that institutionally sponsored support for innovation can be mediated by focused initiatives that recruit beyond school leaders alone—potentially implicating a variety of internal and exter-nal professions.”
BackgroundPromoting junior high school students’ creativity in maker education: The design thinking approach
Chen, P., Wang, R., & Ma, Y. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101764 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Max, A., Lukas, S., & Weitzel, H. (2023) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13324 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Making a Makerspace for children: A mixed-methods study in Chinese kindergartens
Xiang, S., Yang, W., & Yeter, I. H. (2023) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100583 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Teaching & learning in makerspaces: equipping teachers to become justice-oriented maker-educators
Heredia, S. C., & Tan, E. (2021) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2020.1860871 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“Teachers reported technology issues, lack of administrative and collegial support, and a lack of time for planning and implementing making in their classrooms (Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialAccessible Maker-Based Approaches to Educational Robotics in Online Learning
Mehrotra, A., Giang, C., El‐Hamamsy, L., Guinchard, A., Dame, A., Zahnd, G., & Francesco Mondada, C. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3094158 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“As a matter of fact, an authentic making experience can provide insights for teachers to model their own maker activities to engage their students [37], [39], [61], [67].”
BackgroundWhat makes a maker teacher? Examining key characteristics of two maker educators
Hughes, J. M., Robb, J., Hagerman, M. S., Laffier, J., & Cotnam-Kappel, M. (2021) · International Journal of Educational Research Open · doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100118 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Bower, M., Stevenson, M., Forbes, A., et al. (2020) · Educational Media International · doi:10.1080/09523987.2020.1744845 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“For further details about the professional learning program, see (Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundSelf-citationExploring Factors Affecting Elementary School Teachers’ Adoption of 3D Printers In Teaching
Branko, A., Šorgo, A., Helm, C., Weinhandl, R., & Lang, V. (2023) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-023-00909-y · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“…the use of 3DMP in individual subjects in elementary school, some research suggests that this teaching tool is ideal for achieving transdisciplinarity in the classroom and implementing the STEAM approach in elementary schools (Bower et al., 2018; Stevenson et al., 2019; Togou et al., 2018).”
MethodBridging distance: Practical and pedagogical implications of virtual Makerspaces
Lock, J., Redmond, P., Orwin, L. M., Powell, A., Becker, S., Hollohan, P., & Johnson, C. (2020) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12452 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Yang, W., Liang, L., Xiang, S., & Yeter, I. H. (2025) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101754 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Quintana-Ordorika, A., Esturo, E. C., Portillo, J., & Ruíz, U. G. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12293-4 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“…based on maker education have shown that participation in a maker program helps to increase participants’ maker skills and technological knowledge, especially when it comes to understanding how to choose the right technologies for specific goals (Jones et al., 2020; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
Ideation to implementation: A 4-year exploration of innovating education through maker pedagogy
Shively, K., Stith, K. M., & Rubenstein, L. D. (2021) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2021.1872472 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“Teachers must also understand the educational content and process knowledge addressed in these spaces, such as those described in STEM standards (Avery & Reeve, 2013; Oliver, 2016; Tan, 2019).”
BackgroundMaking the shift to virtual professional learning
Morrison, L. J., & Hughes, J. M. (2022) · Technology Pedagogy and Education · doi:10.1080/1475939x.2022.2156918 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
“Considerations for maker professional learning include a lack of infrastructure in the teachers’ schools (i.e., reliable wifi), access to just-in-time or on-hand technical support and/or issues with technology (Hughes et al., 2018; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundA scoping review of design thinking in school-based teacher professional learning and development
Blundell, C. N. (2022) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2022.2132269 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Driving is believing: Using telepresence robots to access makerspace for teachers in rural areas
Chen, Y., Cao, L., Guo, L., & Cheng, J. (2022) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13225 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Heredia, S. C., & Fisher, M. (2022) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-022-00751-8 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Like other studies on PST maker education (Stevenson et al., 2019; Jones et al., 2020), the experience in the MiR program supported their increased capacity and understanding of how to use the various technologies available, as well as strategies for selecting the appropriate technologies to use.”
BackgroundMethodBlundell, C. N. (2024) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2024.2422063 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“As such, design thinking represented a responsive model of PLD (Stevenson et al .”
InfluentialGalvin, P., Klarin, A., Nyuur, R. B.-B.-I., & Burton, N. (2021) · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537325.2021.1959031 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“For example, educators have shown that involving students in DIY science activities such as building a robot in a fab lab or using 3D printers to create components leads students to further their interest in STEM areas (Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundLearning with environments: Developing an ecological psychology inspired relational pedagogy
Phillips, L. G., & Finn, R. (2020) · Pedagogies An International Journal · doi:10.1080/1554480x.2020.1781639 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“…by parents own art practices and some familiarity with the ateliers (art studios) in the Reggio Emilia schools and a concern to offer some time and space for creativity and making that was learner driven thus aligning with more recent descriptions of maker spaces (see, Stevenson et al., 2019).”
ResultMaking it in undergraduate STEM education: the role of a maker course in fostering STEM identities
Lyon, E. G., Kochevar, R., & Gould, J. (2023) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2023.2179376 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Teacher–Artist Partnership Framework Within School Makerspaces to Foster Students’ Creativity
Santos, I. M., Menano, L., & Habak, C. (2022) · International Journal of Art & Design Education · doi:10.1111/jade.12439 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Pijls, M., van Eijck, T., Kragten, M., & Bert Bredeweg, A. (2022) · Journal for STEM Education Research · doi:10.1007/s41979-022-00070-w · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“To develop their new professional competencies, library staff needs time and training (Moorefield-Lang & Coker, 2019), preferably in a professional learning community (Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundExamining the Digital Learning Material Preparation Competencies of Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers
Şimşek, M., & Yazıcı, N. (2021) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.21.68.8.3 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Herman, H., Sultan, S., & Suardi, S. (2025) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-025-00849-0 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“To address these issues, tiered training programs using micro-credentials have been shown to improve TPACK by up to 40% [24], while communities of practice (e.g., #EdTechChat) have built global networks of over 5,000 teachers [68].”
InfluentialTeachers as makers: How K-12 teachers design 3D making lessons for classroom teaching
Chen, Y., Cao, L., & Zhang, Y. (2022) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11475-w · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“One common feature of such professional development is to have teachers first experience 3D making as learners and then ask them to design 3D model-based lessons 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2023) 28:6947–6975 as teacher-designers (Milara et al., 2020; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundDeveloping a Makerspace Learning and Assessment Framework
Buxton, A., Kay, L., & Nutbrown, B. (2022) · doi:10.1145/3535227.3535232 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“They are recognised for promoting habits of mind such as creativity, critical thinking and problem solving through hands-on making using both physical and digital applications [14].”
BackgroundSeverance, S., Miller, E. C. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2024) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057267.2024.2397300 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Namukasa, I. K., Gecü-Parmaksız, Z., Hughes, J. M., & da Silva, R. S. R. (2023) · ZDM · doi:10.1007/s11858-023-01534-y · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“Participation in PD programs based on making is reported through experiences of maker pedagogies to improve teachers’ attitudes toward using making in learning and improve interest and confidence in teaching through making (Jones, 2021; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundMaking STEAM-Based Professional Learning: A Four-Year Design-Based Research Study
Hughes, J. M., Morrison, L. J., & Robb, J. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology · doi:10.21432/cjlt27915 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“…of different levels of inquiry (Little, 1994; Watt & Coyler, 2014), adequate time to explore unfamiliar technologies (Hughes & Burke, 2014; Stevenson et al., 2019), and an environment in which teachers feel comfortable exploring and collaboratively developing their understanding of new…”
BackgroundOtchie, W. O., Pedaste, M., Bardone, E., & Chounta, I. (2021) · The Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ejel.19.6.2486 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Makerspaces: Building Confidence in STEM for Primary Preservice Teachers
Halliburton, P., Georgiou, H., & Nielsen, W. (2024) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-024-10153-w · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“…only by its heterogeneity; there are no agreed upon definitions, activities, designs or overall approaches to incorporating makerspaces in education, with several calls for additional research (e.g. Blackley et al., 2017; Falloon et al., 2020a, b; Mersand, 2020; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
Caratachea, M., Greene, M. D., & Jones, W. M. (2023) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-023-00865-7 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“Six studies aligned maker-centered learning with STEM/STEAM learning, or made claims around the important role that maker-centered learning could play in cross-curricular learning, and how maker-centered learning could enrich the information being taught in schools (Blackley et al., 2017; Collins, 2017; Miller, 2016;…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHatzigianni, M., Gregoriadis, A., Moumoutzis, N., et al. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65624-9_2 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationAdvancing computational thinking education: Insights from systems thinking applications
Hamidi, A. (2024) · Human Systems Management · doi:10.3233/hsm-240024 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Constructivism is characterized by several key features, such as learning through hands-on experiences, utilizing technology for construction, embracing challenges, and learning from mistakes, all contribute to fostering self-directed learning skills [40].”
Peleg, A., & Levy, S. T. (2023) · Journal of Research in Childhood Education · doi:10.1080/02568543.2023.2282662 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Australian teachers’ views on how primary science education can be improved
Deehan, J., & MacDonald, A. (2023) · The Australian Educational Researcher · doi:10.1007/s13384-023-00638-4 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“…science PD opportunities and support to primary science education through structured PD programs (Aubusson et al., 2019; Hume, 2012), Professional Learning Networks (Ralls et al., 2020; Stevenson et al., 2019) and short-form micro credentials (Miller & Jorre de St Jorrre, 2022; West et al., 2020).”
Characterizing the Foundations of School Makerspace Research and Preparing for the Future
Rouse, R., Torralba, J., & Mora, E. A. E. (2025) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-025-01103-y · Cited by 4 · see citing works
The Use of Roblox in Elementary School Science Education during Pandemics
Zhai, J. (2024) · Open Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.4236/jss.2024.125025 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
An Overview of the Literature on Design Thinking in Education and Educational Research
Sun, Y., Wang, C., & Hu, S. (2023) · Journal of Education and Educational Research · doi:10.54097/jeer.v2i3.7745 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
A World Café Approach for Maker Education Context into the Internet of Things Course
Chiu, P. (2022) · 網際網路技術學刊 · doi:10.53106/160792642022092305001 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Moumoutzis, N., Koukis, A., Christoulakis, M., et al. (2020) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-49932-7_93 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Solanas, O. N., Usart, M., & Valls, C. (2025) · Innoeduca International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation · doi:10.24310/ijtei.112.2025.21195 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“This study contributes to the field of maker education by identifying key points for teacher training, in line with current needs around the lack of information on how to effectively prepare teachers (Ioannou & Gravel, 2025; Stevenson et al., 2019).”
InfluentialGreenhow, C. M., Galvin, S. M., Willet, K. B. S., & Chapman, A. L. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818630-5.14040-0 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Unleashing the Learners: Teacher Self-Efficacy in Facilitating School-Based Makerspaces
Koole, M. L., Anderson, K., & Wilson, J. R. (2020) · in education · doi:10.37119/ojs2020.v26i1.452 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Other researchers have echoed this imperative (Stevenson et al., 2019) and new research on this topic has begun to emerge.”
BackgroundInfluentialMaurer, B., & Ingold, S. (2023) · MedienPädagogik Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung · doi:10.21240/mpaed/56/2023.12.02.x · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Investigating an Instructional Model for Integrated STEM in Teacher Education
Campbell, L. O., & Damico, N. K. (2023) · Journal of STEM Teacher Education · doi:10.61403/2158-6594.1512 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
A Systems Thinking Approach to Computational Thinking in Education
Hamidi, A. (2023) · doi:10.15626/lnulic.45.2023 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Reimagining the Mathematics Curriculum Through a Cross-Curricular and Maker Education Lens
Namukasa, I. K., Bertrand, M. G., Tangredi, D., et al. (2023) · International Journal of Teacher Education and Professional Development · doi:10.4018/ijtepd.324166 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“, 2017; Corbat & Quinn, 2018; Papert & Harel, 1991), Piaget’s constructivism (Corbat & Quinn, 2018), Dewey’s notions of learning by doing (Bullock & Sator, 2018; Stevenson et al., 2019), and Vygotsky’s theories of development (Cantelon, 2018; Martin, 2015).”
Innovative Digital Tools for Online Learning
Gecü-Parmaksız, Z., & Hughes, J. M. (2023) · Journal of Educational Informatics · doi:10.51357/jei.v4i1.213 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Hua, X. (2021) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v16i08.22129 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“There are many problems with the convention teacher education model, such as the short internship time during pre-job training, and the limited experience, pertinence, and effectiveness of on-the-job training [1-4].”
BackgroundTrahan, K. W., Ramos, R. D. A., Zollars, J., et al. (2020) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-2517-3.ch006 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Development and validation of the Maker Competency Assessment Tool for EducatorsPreprint
Nadal, O., Usart, M., Valls, C., et al. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8260826/v1 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Mørch, A. I., & Litherland, K. T. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.70027 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Chen, Y., & Cao, L. (2024) · Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education · doi:10.1080/21532974.2024.2345055 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Specifically, previous research found that teachers struggled with learning and using innovative maker tools (Novak & Wisdom, 2020) and were concerned with the technology issues they may encounter in maker-centered instruction (Stevenson et al., 2019).”
BackgroundBecker, S. (2019) · doi:10.11575/prism/36729 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Haşlaman, T., & Aksoy, E. (2026) · Journal of Educational Technology Systems · doi:10.1177/00472395261465915
Nadal, O., Meix, M. S., Recalde, J. M., et al. (2026) · Edutec Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa · doi:10.21556/edutec.2026.96.4773
Kushairi, N., & Robertson, S. L. (2026) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-06335-0
“Therefore, curriculum planning must be executed in an innovative approach (Stevenson et al. 2019) so that it serves as a guide for staff development.”
Flores, L. A. V., Chiliguano, G. E. C., Ponce, A.-D.-C. C., et al. (2026) · Revista Ciencia Innovadora · doi:10.64422/rci.v4n1.2026.140
Zou, T. X. P., Chow, J., Lee, B. Y. H., Pang, K. K. Y., Chan, S., & Tsang, A. S. (2026) · Journal of Education and Teaching · doi:10.1080/02607476.2026.2633275
“When it is positioned as a learning subject, teachers assume a participant’s role and learn its principles and applications (Stevenson et al. 2019).”
InfluentialNadal, O. R., Usart, M., Valls, C., et al. (2026) · Discover Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s43621-026-02857-y · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Shaping STEM attitudes: the impact of a Makerspace experience on Primary preservice teachers
Stevenson, M., Georgiou, H., van der Jagt, E., & Hellwig, A. F. J. (2026) · Research in Science & Technological Education · doi:10.1080/02635143.2026.2628604
Self-citationMaker Education and Makerspaces: Challenges and Opportunities for STEAM Education
Quintana-Ordorika, A., Garay-Ruiz, U., & Portillo, J. (2026) · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-13788-3_4
Contar historias como estrategia pedagógica para la comprensión lectora de estudiantes
Álvarez, E. C. S., Tituaña, M. V. C., Noroña, P. F. V., & Lucintuña, J. C. C. (2025) · Revista Ciencia Innovadora · doi:10.64422/rci.v3n4.2025.108 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Insights into Effective Additive Manufacturing Training Methods for Multi-professional Groups
Hirvimäki, M., & Poutiainen, I. (2025) · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94547-2_13
Students as makers using technologies
Ellis, D. J., Rouse, R., Rowston, K., Puddicombe, C., von Mengersen, B., & Levins, M. (2025) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003490715-12
Hai-Jew, S. (2024) · Advances in multimedia and interactive technologies book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-2927-6.ch005
Aktan, O., & İlğan, A. (2024) · Siirt Eğitim Dergisi · doi:10.58667/sedder.1413258
Assessing Experiential Learning in a K-12 Afterschool Makerspace
Dzbenski, S. L. (2024) · doi:10.18122/td.2160.boisestate
Industry-Based STEM Lab Implementation (Work in Progress)
Walls, W. H., & Strimel, G. (2024) · 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings · doi:10.18260/1-2--37330
(2023) · Journal of STEM Teacher Education · doi:10.61403/2158-6594.1520
Maker Education and Teacher Training; a Systematic Review of the LiteraturePreprint
Quintana-Ordorika, A., Ruíz, U. G., & Portillo, J. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4605953
Trahan, K. W., Ramos, R. D. A., Zollars, J., et al. (2022) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-6295-9.ch017
Johari, A., Wahat, N. W. B. A., & Idris, K. (2021) · International Journal of Human Resource Studies · doi:10.5296/ijhrs.v11i4s.19229
Wakano, A., Prihono, E. W., Lapele, F., & Wardana, B. H. (2021) · International Conference on Learning Innovation and Quality Education (ICLIQE) · doi:10.1145/3516875.3516996
- Authors
- Stevenson, M., Bower, M., Falloon, G., Forbes, A., & Hatzigianni, M.
- Affiliations
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Bower, Matt
- Venue
- British Journal of Educational Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-03-08
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1260-1274
- ISSN
- 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8535
- OpenAlex
- W2922044673
- Semantic Scholar
- bbe8354b3bd38a58f3e2ce7d6f123c86b02541f4
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 27.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- British Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion)
- FedUni ResearchOnline (Federation University Australia) (submittedVersion)
- Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- NSW Department of Education
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
- Keywords
- makerspaces, professional learning, primary school teachers, constructionism, 3D design, 3D printing, design thinking, teacher confidence, school leadership, industry partnerships, collegial support, 21st century learning, tablet-based learning
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.
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
