Maker movement: strategy for the construction of knowledge in high school students

Keywords: collaborative learning, maker, social movements, teaching-learning, technology innovation

Abstract

The objective of this work is to identify the characteristics of the Maker movement that facilitate its use as a teaching-learning strategy for the construction of knowledge in high school students. This research was carried out using the desk research methodology, based on evidence from previous application studies of the Maker Movement for the training and motivation of high school students. The Maker philosophy has fostered a new environment for learning based on the theory of constructivism, whose main characteristic is the involvement of students in the creation of artifacts that serve as conductive threads for a series of processes to be carried out that involve cooperation, collaboration and lifelong learning, underpinning processes of experimentation and exploration, in which all phases of the scientific method must be covered, requiring the use of interdisciplinary knowledge, always in a supportive environment. The Maker movement is a catalyst, which promotes learning, with a high dose of motivation, increasing student performance. In Ecuador, mechanisms have been established to promote this culture through the installation and growth of FabLab, in addition to having an increased activity of maker movements in educational institutes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arredondo, F., Vázquez, J., & Velázquez, L. (2019). STEM and gender gap in Latin America. Magazine of El Colegio de San Luis, 9(18), 137-158.

Chamoso, J. M., Cáceres, M. J., & Azcárate, P. (2012). Reflection on the teaching-learning process in the initial training of teachers. Characterization of the issues on which pre-service mathematics teachers reflect. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(2), 154-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.08.003

Dougherty, D. (2016). Free to make: How the maker movement is changing our schools, our jobs, and our minds: North Atlantic Books.

Ferneley, E., & Bell, F. (2006). Using bricolage to integrate business and information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation, 26(2), 232-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.03.005

Foundation, T.F. (2020). The International Fab Lab Network.

Fuentes, M., & González, J. (2019). What stem gains with gamification. Academy and Virtuality, 12(2).

García, F., Portillo, J., Romo, J., & Benito, M. (2007). Digital natives and learning models. Paper presented at the SPDECE.

González, Y., Pérez-Rodríguez, J.A, & Dunia, E. (2018). Design of a data acquisition and processing system with the use of multi-sensors for university physics laboratories. INGENIERÍA UC Magazine, 25(1).

Gonzalez, YS, Dunia-Amair, ER, & Pérez-Rodríguez, JA (2017). Didactic prototype for learning mechanics in university physics laboratories through a data acquisition and processing system. Magazine Education in Engineering, 12(24), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.26507/rei.v12n24.781

Gutiérrez, RT (2018). The importance of technological culture in the maker movement. arbor, 194(789), 471.

Handayani, N. D., Mantra, I. B. N., & Suwandi, I. N. (2019). Integrating collaborative learning in cyclic learning sessions to promote students’ reading comprehension and critical thinking. International Research Journal of Management, IT and Social Sciences, 6(5), 303-308. https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v6n5.777

Laal, M., & Ghodsi, S. M. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 31, 486-490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.091

Ludeña, ES (2019). STEAM education and maker culture. Parents and Teachers / Journal of Parents and Teachers, 45-51. doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.14422/pym.i379.y2019.008

Martínez Torán, M. (2016). Why are maker spaces so popular among young people? Youth Research Notebooks, 1(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.22400 / cij.1.e003

Martínez, M. (2016). Why are maker spaces so popular among young people? Youth Research Notebooks, 1(1), 1-17.

Martini, S., & Chiarella, M. (2017). Didactic Maker. Collaborative STEM learning strategies in Industrial Design. Paper presented at the Proceedings XX SIGraDi Congress, Concepción. Chile.

McFarlane, C. (2009). Translocal assemblages: space, power and social movements. Geoforum, 40(4), 561-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.05.003

Núñez, G., & Hepp, P. (2018). Club Network: Maker Movement and development of skills in Chilean schoolchildren.

Pérez, J.A., Rodríguez, C.G., Rodrìguez, M., & Villacreses, C. (2020). Maker spaces: motivational tool for electrical engineering students at the Technical University of Manabí, Ecuador. Spaces, 41(02).

Pérez-Rodríguez, J.A., Rodriguez Borges, C.G., Pérez, A.V., & Bowen, C.A. (2020). Emulation of System as Strategy for Teaching of Mechanical System. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.37200/IJPR/V24I2/PR200368

Ramos, S.H., Garay, G.O.R., & Chávez, M.P.Á. (2017). Digitlab: emerging technologies and technology-mediated learning environments to strengthen thinking and communication skills in design disciplines. Scopes. International Communication Magazine.

Rao, H., Morrill, C., & Zald, M. N. (2000). Power plays: How social movements and collective action create new organizational forms. Research in organizational behavior, 22, 237-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(00)22007-8

Rao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2012). Teaching–learning-based optimization: an optimization method for continuous non-linear large scale problems. Information sciences, 183(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2011.08.006

Revelo-Sánchez, O., Collazos-Ordóñez, C.A., & Jiménez-Toledo, J.A. (2018). Collaborative work as a didactic strategy for programming teaching / learning: a systematic literature review. TecnoLógicas, 21(41), 115-134.

Rodriguez Borges, C.G., Pérez-Rodríguez, J.A., Lituma Ramirez, E.D., & Perez Baltar, A.B. (2020). Software Development for Transformer Model Supporting Significant Learning Electrical Machines. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.37200/IJPR/V24I2/PR200373

Ropin, H., Pfleger-Landthaler, A., & Irsa, W. (2020). A FabLab as integrative part of a Learning Factory. Procedia Manufacturing, 45, 355-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.033

Ruiz-Velasco, E. (2007). Educatronics: Innovation in science and technology learning: Ediciones Díaz de Santos.

Salamanca, B. dlbd T. y. D. dl U. d. (2020). The figures of the “maker” movement do not stop growing.

Sanabria, O.H. (2018). Analysis of the relationship of the maker movement with technology education. A look at the ETITC “robotics and 3D printing” seedbed.

Şener, S., & Sarıdoğan, E. (2011). The effects of science-technology-innovation on competitiveness and economic growth. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 815-828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.127

Tesconi, S. (2018). The teacher as a maker: teacher training in educational making (doi: https://ddd.uab.cat/record/201253).

Tesconi, S., & Arias, L. (2015). The transformative potential of making in teacher education: A case study on teacher training through making and prototyping. Paper presented at the International Conference on Distributed, Ambient, and Pervasive Interactions.

Van Boxtel, C., Van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and instruction, 10(4), 311-330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00002-5

Vossoughi, S., & Bevan, B. (2014). Making and tinkering: A review of the literature. National Research Council Committee on Out of School Time STEM, 1-55.

Published
2020-06-06
How to Cite
Cevallos, M. A. M., Cedeño, Ángela M. C., & Gámes, M. R. (2020). Maker movement: strategy for the construction of knowledge in high school students. International Research Journal of Management, IT and Social Sciences, 7(4), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v7n4.935
Section
Research Articles