Maker Education: Assessment, Documentation, and Sharing With a Wider Community

Maker Education: Assessment, Documentation, and Sharing With a Wider Community

Marja Gabrielle Bertrand, Immaculate Kizito Namukasa
Copyright: © 2022 |Pages: 12
DOI: 10.4018/IJOPCD.304083
OnDemand:
(Individual Articles)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

Makerspaces and the learning and teaching associated with them have become a growing area of interest in K-12 education, especially with respect to student engagement in STEM. While the benefits of maker education in schools have been studied, little empirical research has been on how to assess K-12 student learning through making. In this paper, the authors address this gap by examining the research question: How do educators assess the learning experience in maker education? We took a sample of 4 different non-profit and in-school STEAM programs in Ontario, Canada and carried out a qualitative case study. We conducted interviews, observations, and document analysis. The findings revealed that authentic assessment practices were used at each research site. Further, sharing the learning experience with the wider community beyond the classroom benefited the students and teachers in the programs as well as students and educators both local and outside the programs. This study sheds light on the nature and benefits of assessment and documentation in makerspaces.
Article Preview
Top

Background

Education researchers have noted that maker education programs in schools promote “curiosity and play in open-ended exploration . . . and put the joy of learning back into learning” (as cited in Mulcaster, 2017, p. 26; Burker, 2015). The “focus tends to be less on the actual construction of the artifacts and more on how the knowledge is shared between the learners” (as cited in Mulcaster, 2017, p. 26; Fleming, 2015). Maker education prepares “students to be producers, not consumers, of knowledge. Students in a makerspace make things; they do not just simply use them” (as cited in Mulcaster, 2017, p. 26; Papert & Harel, 1991). Maker education also promotes “inquiry, play, imagination, innovation, critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration and personalized learning” (Hughes, 2017, p.103).

Context: Assessment, Documentation and Reflection

According to the Ontario Ministry of Education (OME) (2020), where the study was carried out “the primary purpose of assessment and evaluation is to improve student learning . . . [through] the collection of meaningful information that will help inform instructional decisions, promote student engagement, and [can] improve . . . learning for all students” (p. 45). Assessment for learning “may include observations, . . . learning conversations, questioning, conferences. . . [and] self-reflections” (OME, 2010, p. 28). The OME (2012, 2015) suggests three stages for pedagogical documentation: observing and recording student experiences, interpreting the learning in the service of pedagogy, and responding, sharing, and building a culture of inquiry and collaboration. The Capacity Building Series (OME, 2015) states, “pedagogical documentation is intended to uncover the student’s thinking and learning process, it has the potential to help us look at learning in new ways” (p.1).

Top

Theoretical Framework

The authentic assessment framework guides this research study. In this paper, the researchers decided to focus on assessment, specifically authentic assessment. Further assessment is understood to be coupled with documentation, reflection and sharing of the learning experience.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 14: 1 Issue (2024)
Volume 13: 1 Issue (2023)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2022)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2021)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2011)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing