Title: How the Maker Movement Can Influence Instruction in Schools
Author Name: Colleen Jordan
1. Introduction
This chapter explores how the maker movement can influence instruction in K-12 schools to give students opportunities for authentic, informal, and active learning.
There is no one distinct start point to the maker movement, but several events in the late 1990s and early 2000s exhibited a change in the way educators, writers, and hobbyists began to shift thinking on how producing physical and digital artifacts using technology could affect learning. In 1998, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Neil Gershenfield created a course called How to Make (Almost) Anything, in response to his students showing proficiency in theory but lacking skills to make physical parts of their projects (Maietta & Aliverti, 2015). In 2005, Make:, a magazine and blog showcasing do-it-yourself (DIY) projects, most utilizing desktop fabrication technology, was launched by Dale Dougherty and O’Reilly Media (Anderson, 2013). Maker Faire, an opportunity for makers to exhibit their work, began in San Francisco in 2005 (Dougherty, 2016) and continues in other cities around the world to this day. Notable elements of the maker movement are the emphasis on tinkering as a meaningful tool for learning and creation (Dougherty, 2016), the use of desktop fabrication tools such as 3D printers, and collaboration, in person and online amongst participants (Anderson, 2013).
While the maker movement may be relatively young, the principles it was founded on have much deeper roots. Dale Dougherty often speaks about finding inspiration from Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines from the mid twentieth century and the groundbreaking work of the hacker community in the 1970s and 1980s at companies like Intel (Dougherty, 2016). What separates the maker movement from earlier forms of craftmanship and DIY trends is integrating creation of artifacts with computers and emerging forms of technology like rapid-prototyping (Dougherty, 2016). In the late 1970s and early 1980s, at the time of the introduction of the first personal computers, Seymour Papert was experimenting with introducing the LOGO programming language to students for computer-aided-instruction. He proposed and showed groups of students using this as a new way of expressing what they have learned and as a way to understand new concepts in subjects like mathematics (Papert, 1980). Later in the decade, researchers at MIT would write about using similar approaches to teach computer science to college students with drawing called turtle geometry (Abelson & diSessa, 1984).
I have worked with several organizations in the Atlanta area over the last five years to bring lessons and strategies from the maker movement into K-12 classrooms and after-school activities. Organizations I have worked with include Decatur Makers, Drew Charter School, and the Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics, and Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology (CEISMC). In my work, I have seen that the maker movement offers opportunities and strategies for informal, active, and authentic learning in the classroom, both from the design if activities and from the change in mindsets that it fosters. This paper will focus how lessons and strategies from the maker movement can be used in to assist K-12 classroom instruction and also detail how work with organizations like Decatur Makers can bring this work into classrooms.
2. Overview of the Case
There are several ways that schools in the Atlanta area are integrating strategies from the maker movement into their curriculum. While some schools, like Drew Charter School in the East Lake neighborhood of Atlanta have built full makerspaces (Drew Charter School, 2022), other schools work with organizations like Decatur Makers to bring maker activities to their school communities.
Decatur Makers is a community makerspace located in Decatur, GA. Decatur Makers was initially founded in 2012 to provide robotics students in Decatur with a place to work and practice. Since officially opening its doors in 2016, they have expanded to over 400 members, and collaborate with organizations like MakerEd to bring programming to schools (Decatur Makers, 2020).
Their mission exceeds just providing a place for students to work. They aim to build and empower a community where anyone can make anything and all people are builder, creators, and learners (Decatur Makers, 2020). They also work to bring maker-led activities into educational environments (Diorio, 2022). The organization now provides access to classes and fabrication tools like 3D printers, laser cutters, and a woodshop to all of its members. I spoke with Executive Director, Irm Diorio, about the work and outreach efforts of the organization.
Decatur Makers partners and work with several organizations and schools in Atlanta and Decatur, GA. Schools they have worked with include Drew Charter School, City of Decatur Schools, and Westminster Academy. They also work with other organizations that provide educational opportunities for K-12 students like the Goizueta Foundation, Georgia Tech, and the Global Village Project (Diorio, 2022).
The work that they do with schools and organizations varies. With some schools they provide professional development for teachers introducing them to maker technologies like 3D printing and how to integrate coding to physical projects with microcontrollers like the Circuit Playground Express. They also work directly with students on projects like building Rube Goldberg Machines, teaching soldering, and novel engineering. With Drew Charter School, they did a year-long project with Drew Charter School to bring students into the makerspace called Maker Scholars. They also offer additional programming for students outside of school like their Girls Maker Club monthly Family Build Night (Diorio, 2022).
In our conversation, Ms. Diorio, emphasized that Decatur Makers’ Motto is “Build. Share. Explore.” and that the organization aims to exhibit and share these skills in many ways. She says there is a growing need to teaching 21st century skills to students and allow them to access to an environment where failure is okay. Decatur Makers also aims to be intergenerational, where not only are students learning from older members of the community, but they are able to teach as well. Contributions like this help teach students that their work is meaningful and that they are “able to become agents of change in their own lives and communities”. Introducing students to opportunities like these also allows them to become self-directed and empowered in their learning, build confidence, and build critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Diorio, 2022).
3. Solutions Implemented
Bringing strategies and lessons from the maker movement into K-12 Schools can take many forms and be implemented on many scales. Some schools might invest fully and create a makerspace program, while other schools may offer a few opportunities for project- based learning (PjBL) for students or professional development for teachers with organizations like Decatur Makers.
Makerspaces are one way to bring the maker movement into schools. While some schools like Drew Charter School have extensive makerspace programs to expand the teaching of these concepts (Drew Charter School, 2022), most schools cannot afford to provide such opportunities. Prior to having their makerspace program, Decatur Makers worked with Drew Charter School to offer access to their space and tools to students through their Maker Scholar Program. They also work with other schools to give students memberships and access to the space (Diorio, 2022). While having access to a makerspace within a school can bring many opportunities for hands-on learning and collaboration, there needs to be adequate support and planning from teachers and administration to fully utilize these resources and support learner directed activities. In a makerspace, students have the opportunity to use the tools that engineers, designers, and people from various professions use in their daily work. Offering students the chance to use these tools not only offers them experience they can use in future careers, but allows them to explore and experiment and build connections to what they are learning in their structured classes.
Steam or art trunks are also another way that schools can bring maker technology into the classroom without the need for investment into a full makerspace. Steam trunks could be called mobile makerspaces and are rolling carts with supplies and tools for working on a variety of hands-on projects. Drew Charter School is one school that currently offers steam trunks for all of their grades, and they explain them as a way to transform any classroom into a makerspace and to bring the opportunity for exploratory learning anywhere in the school (Steam at Drew Charter, 2022). Decatur Makers is currently working with several schools in Atlanta and Decatur to bring this cost-effective option to a wider audience, and helping to build these trunks for other schools (Diorio, 2022).
Decatur Makers works with schools and organizations on one-off and short term projects as well. They hold coding classes for teachers and students. They also hold design challenge events for students and offer assistance a on projects to school and home-school groups (Diorio, 2022).
One last targeted effort Decatur Makers offers schools is professional development for teachers. Through their collaborations with the Governor’s Office for Student Achievement, Goizueta Foundation, and MakerEd, they are able to offer an extensive variety of classes to teachers. Skills taught at these workshops include design-thinking, coding with micro controllers, and guided e-textile projects (Diorio, 2022). Offering professional development classes to teachers not only gives them the knowledge to use specific skills with the tools they have access to, it also gives them the confidence they need and ideas to bring it into their own classrooms. While bringing maker technology into the classroom can be effective for students on its own merits, preparing classroom teachers to effectively incorporate these strategies into their pedagogy increases the impact these practices can have.
4. Outcomes
Much of the benefit of bringing maker activities into the classroom does not come from the specific skills that students learn, but the opportunities that it gives to students for active and informal learning and exposure to authentic tasks. These activities can used as ways to implement constructivist and constructionist approaches. Active learning brings constructionism into the classroom by providing students with access to technology and the ability to work to solve problems (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018).
In these situations, students are exposed to authentic tasks, which are activities that have real-world relevance and simulate activities and collaboration find in careers and outside of the classroom (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). In these situations, teachers take a role more as a facilitator, allowing students to guide their own learning and build connections independently. The opportunity for informal learning exists in these situations as well. Informal learning happens when learners set their own goals and pursue this knowledge on their own (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). Allowing students the freedom to explore, fail, and work at their own pace for its own sake, rather than to create a specific artifact, creates conditions that allow students to learn in these ways.
Maker activities can also function as a successful way to integrate technology into the classroom. Many attempts have been made to bring technology into the classroom since the early 1900s, from instructional images and films to using personal computers (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). Many of these attempts to bring technology into the classroom have ultimately failed to live up to the potential early advocates imagined (Amiel & Reeves, 2008). The difference in this effort is that using technology for its own sake is not the end goal, it is a way to use it as a means of exploring and experimenting. In speaking with Ms. Diorio, she emphasized that the goal of bringing maker activities into the classroom isn’t the creation of a specific item, it is in the opportunity to explore and fail in a safe way, “the journey to get there is like is what the benefit is not necessarily the final product” (Diorio, 2022).
Besides from just learning from the creation process, organizations like MakerEd MIT’s Playful Journey Lab are creating tools and trainings for educators to assess and document maker activities in the classroom (MIT Playful Journey Lab, 2020).
The benefits of allowing students this unstructured activity extend outside the classroom as well. Students who were involved in Decatur Makers activities through their schools have gone on to found clubs and start small businesses upon their interests (Diorio, 2022). Ms. Diorio gave examples of a group of students who created and designed light-up headbands to sell and another group that founded the makerspace’s PC Build Club to build and refurbish personal computers.
5. Implications
As the maker movement is still relatively young, the lessons from the rise of community makerspaces and integrating maker activities into schools are still being learned. Bringing maker activities and strategies into the classroom, either through initiatives within the school or with help from outside organizations, can help students by providing opportunities for active informal learning and exposure to authentic tasks. Learning how to assess student work on these activities could also lead to further adoption.
One of the benefits of strategies like this is also the wide network of people the maker movement has tapped into. Collaboration is one cornerstone of the maker movement, and the design of activities and help can come from many voices outside the traditional classroom.
In my work as an educator over the last several years, I have noticed one aspect that is missing from much of the published literature on bringing the maker movement into K-12 classrooms, and that is on the difficulty of actually bringing these opportunities into the classroom. From my experience, many classroom teachers, while they may have been provided the materials for these activities, lack the time and support to actually implement them in their classrooms. The barrier to adoption does not seem to come from lack of interest or knowledge now, but from not enough time to plan and integrate these activities with their already filled schedules. I hope in the coming years to see more institutional support for teachers to bring making activities into the classroom, more education for pre-service teachers on how to use them, and more published works detailing this need.
Technology is ever evolving and more ubiquitous than ever. Personal computers have been replaced with tablets and smartphones, and fabrication tools that once only resided in universities or factories are now accessible to children inside elementary schools. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, schools are increasingly using technology and constantly seeing a need to adapt their teaching methods. Hopefully the strategies and lessons learned from the maker movement can be successfully further integrated into more classrooms in the coming years to meet the changing demands of today’s world to successfully teach students in meaningful ways.
6. Works Cited
Abelson, H., & diSessa, A. (1984). Turtle Geometry: The Computer as a Medium for Exploring Mathematics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-Based Research and Educational Technology: Rethinking Technology and the Research Agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), pp. 29-40.
Anderson, C. (2013, June). 20 Years of Wired: Maker movement. Wired.
Decatur Makers. (2020, July 15). History and Growth. Retrieved April 2022, from Decatur Makers: https://decaturmakers.org/about/history-and-growth/
Diorio, I. (2022, April 20). Executive Director, Decatur Makers. (C. Jordan, Interviewer)
Dougherty, D. (2016). Free to Make: How The Maker Movement Is Changing Our Schools, Our Jobs, And Our Minds. Berkeley, California: North Atlantic Books.
Drew Charter School. (2022). Makerspaces at Drew. Retrieved from Steam at Drew Charter: https://steamatdrew.weebly.com/makerspaces.html
Maietta, A., & Aliverti, P. (2015). The Maker’s Manual. San Francisco, California: Maker Media, Inc.
MIT Playful Journey Lab. (2020). Designing for Documentation & Assessment. Retrieved April 2022, from Section 3: Interpretation & Communication: https://playfulmit.github.io/beyond-rubrics/modules/interpretation%20&%20communication/Interpretation-and-Communication/
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, And Powerful Ideas. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2018). Trends and Issues in Instructionalk Design and Technology: Fourth Edition. New York, New York: Pearson.
Steam at Drew Charter. (2022). STEAM Trunks. Retrieved April 2022, from Steam At Drew: https://steamatdrew.weebly.com/steam-trunks.html