Assessing learning in technology-rich maker activities: A systematic review of empirical research

被引:47
|
作者
Lin, Qiao [1 ]
Yin, Yue [1 ]
Tang, Xiaodan [2 ]
Hadad, Roxana [1 ,3 ,4 ]
Zhai, Xiaoming [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, 1040 West Harrison St, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, 625 Michigan Ave, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[3] NE Illinois Univ, 5500 North St Louis Ave, Chicago, IL 60625 USA
[4] Univ Calif Los Angeles, 405 Hilgard Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[5] Univ Georgia, 110 Carlton St, Athens, GA 30602 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Maker activities; Learning communities; Teaching/learning strategies; Interdisciplinary projects; Evaluation methodologies; TEXTILES; MOVEMENT; STUDENTS; LIBRARY; 3D;
D O I
10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103944
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Maker activities are drawing increasing attention in the field of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Researchers have developed various assessments for maker activities to examine students' learning outcomes. However, a systematic review of research on such assessments is lacking. To fill this gap, we reviewed empirical studies on maker-based assessments in education. We systematically examined 60 studies regarding the overall features of the maker activities, the learning outcomes that were measured, the assessment formats, and the psychometric evidence of the assessments. Our review results indicate that more than 20 types of maker platforms have been employed in the activities, with e-textiles and LilyPad Arduino being the most popular. Five types of assessment tools have been used prevalently to examine students' diverse learning outcomes, specifically artifact assessments, tests, surveys, interviews, and observations. Most assessments are used in STEM-related maker activities, especially technologycentric activities, to measure STEM-related learning outcomes. Only 15% of the studies provide psychometric evidence of reliability and validity for the assessments. Based on the findings, we provide suggestions for future research which include developing more low-tech maker activities for students in lower-grades and with lower technology proficiency. In addition, future studies should improve rubrics for artifact assessment and explore more assessment tools for non-STEM subjects.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Learning analytics in virtual laboratories: a systematic literature review of empirical research
    Elmoazen, Ramy
    Saqr, Mohammed
    Khalil, Mohammad
    Wasson, Barbara
    SMART LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS, 2023, 10 (01)
  • [42] Does the learning space matter? An evaluation of active learning in a purpose-built technology-rich collaboration studio
    Donkin, Rebecca
    Kynn, Mary
    AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 2021, 37 (01) : 133 - 146
  • [43] Learning analytics in virtual laboratories: a systematic literature review of empirical research
    Ramy Elmoazen
    Mohammed Saqr
    Mohammad Khalil
    Barbara Wasson
    Smart Learning Environments, 10
  • [44] Investigating an Equity-based Participatory Approach to Technology-rich Learning in Community Recreation Centers
    Higgins, Erin
    Posada, Jennifer
    Kimble-Brown, Quinlan
    Abler, Susanna
    Coy, Andrew
    Hamidi, Foad
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2023 CHI CONFERENCE ON HUMAN FACTORS IN COMPUTING SYSTEMS (CHI 2023), 2023,
  • [45] Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Form of Technology-Rich Outcome-Focused Learning Environment Inventory
    Cakir, Mustafa
    KURAM VE UYGULAMADA EGITIM BILIMLERI, 2011, 11 (04): : 1959 - 1963
  • [46] A systematic literature review of empirical research on technology education in early childhood education
    Sara Eliasson
    Louise Peterson
    Annika Lantz-Andersson
    International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2023, 33 : 793 - 818
  • [47] A systematic literature review of empirical research on technology education in early childhood education
    Eliasson, Sara
    Peterson, Louise
    Lantz-Andersson, Annika
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND DESIGN EDUCATION, 2023, 33 (03) : 793 - 818
  • [48] Virtual Solar System Project: Learning Through a Technology-Rich, Inquiry-Based, Participatory Learning Environment
    Sasha A. Barab
    Kenneth E. Hay
    Kurt Squire
    Michael Barnett
    Rae Schmidt
    Kristen Karrigan
    Lisa Yamagata-Lynch
    Christine Johnson
    Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2000, 9 (1) : 7 - 25
  • [49] Improving and Assessing Computational Thinking in Maker Activities: the Integration with Physics and Engineering Learning
    Yue Yin
    Roxana Hadad
    Xiaodan Tang
    Qiao Lin
    Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2020, 29 : 189 - 214
  • [50] The Effect of Precommitment on Student Achievement Within a Technology-Rich Project-Based Learning Environment
    Hao Q.
    Branch R.M.
    Jensen L.
    TechTrends, 2016, 60 (5) : 442 - 448