You are here:

Physical Computing for STEAM Education: Maker-Educators' Experiences in an Online Graduate Course
PROCEEDING

, , , Boise State University, United States

AACE Award

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-31-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

This research explored how K-16 educators learned physical computing, and developed as maker-educators in an online graduate course. With peer support and instructor guidance, these educators designed maker projects using Scratch and Makey Makey, and developed educational maker proposals with plans of teaching the topics of their choice in STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) through physical computing. Educators were positive about the real-world impact of their course maker projects and experiences, and highly valued the support and sense of maker community in this online course.

Citation

Hsu, Y.C., Ching, Y.H. & Baldwin, S. (2017). Physical Computing for STEAM Education: Maker-Educators' Experiences in an Online Graduate Course. In J. Dron & S. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 602-610). Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 7, 2023 from .

© 2017 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Authors (2013).
  2. Authors (2017).
  3. Bequette, J.W., & Bequette, M.B. (2012). A place for art and design education in the STEM conversation. Art Education, 65(2), 40-47.
  4. Bevan, B., Gutwill, J.P., Petrich, M., & Wilkinson, K. (2015). Learning through stem ‐rich tinkering: Findings from a jointly negotiated research project taken up in practice. Science Education, 99(1), 98-120.
  5. Brahms, L.J. (2014). Making as a learning process: Identifying and supporting family learning in informal settings (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (3582510).
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  7. Brown, A. (2015). 3D printing in instructional settings: Identifying a curricular hierarchy of activities. TechTrends, 59(5), 16-24.
  8. Carnegie Mellon University (2016). Integrative design, arts& Technology network. Retrieved from http://ideate.cmu.edu/undergraduate-programs/physical-computing/.
  9. Foster, C., Lande, M., & Jordan, S. (2014). An ethos of sharing in the maker community. Proceedings of the 2014 American Society for Engineering Education (DEED Division).
  10. Gershenfeld, N. (2007). Fab: The coming revolution on your desktop–from personal computers to personal fabrication. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
  11. Gutwill, J.P., Hido, N., & Sindorf, L. (2015). Research to practice: Observing learning in tinkering activities. Curator: The Museum Journal, 58(2), 151-168.
  12. Harvard Educational Review Editorial Board. (2014). The maker movement in education: Designing, creating, and learning across contexts. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 492-494. Retrieved from http://hepg.org/herhome/issues/harvard-educational-review-volume-84-number-4/herarticle/symposium
  13. Hlubinka, M., Dougherty, D., Thomas, P., Chang, S., Hoefer, S., Alexander, I., & McGuire, D. (2013). Makerspace playbook: School edition. Retrieved from Maker Media website: http://makerspace.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/02/MakerspacePlaybook-Feb2013. Pdf.
  14. Jones, W.M., Smith, S., & Cohen, J. (2017). Preservice teachers' beliefs About using maker activities informal K– 12 educational settings: A multi-institutional study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1-15.
  15. Kafai, Y.B., & Peppler, K.A. (2014). Transparency reconsidered: Creative, critical and connected making with etextiles. In M. Boaler & M. Ratto (Eds.), DIY citizenship: Participatory practices of politics, culture and media (pp. 300-310). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
  16. Kostakis, V., Niaros, V., & Giotitsas, C. (2015). 3D printing as a means of learning: An educational experiment in two high schools in Greece. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 118-128.
  17. Martin, L. (2015). The promise of the maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5(1), 30–39. Doi:10.7771/2157-9288.1099.
  18. Martinez, S.L., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, CA: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
  19. New York University (2015). ITP physical computing. Retrieved from https://itp.nyu.edu/physcomp/ O’Sullivan, D., & Igoe, T. (2014). Physical computing: Sensing and controlling the physical world with computers. Boston, MA: Thomson Course Technology.
  20. Oliver, K.M. (2016). Professional development considerations for makerspace leaders, part one: Addressing “what?” and “why?”. TechTrends, 60(2), 160-166.
  21. Peppler, K., & Bender, S. (2013). Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(3), 22-27.
  22. Sheridan, K., Halverson, E.R., Litts, B., Brahms, L., Jacobs-Priebe, L., & Owens, T. (2014). Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 505-531.
  23. Sousa, D.A., & Pilecki, T. (2013). From STEM to STEAM: Using brain-compatible strategies to integrate the arts. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
  24. Wikipedia (2017). Makey Makey. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makey_Makey.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections