Connecting Maker Education to Research
A Dutch educator points out connections to relevant research
Jurriaan Rexwinkel is a Dutch teacher, thinker & maker who lives in Utrecht, The Netherlands. I found his writing about maker education on medium.com/@rexwinkel and began exchanging emails with him. I wrote to him: “I didn't know that self-directed education had such a fancy, hard-to-spell name - Heutagogy.” I also had not read Paul de Blot whom he quotes: "learning begins with connection, connection with oneself, with others, and with the world."
-DD
In Maker Education, the focus is on active learning through hands-on projects, where students develop skills that prepare them for the real world. To understand the impact of Maker Education, it is important to look at which research supports the practice, student development, and the outcomes of this type of education. Below, I discuss the different areas of research that are valuable for improving the practice, fostering student development, and enhancing the results achieved.
1. Research on Learning Methods such as Project-Based Learning (PBL)
Research on learning methods such as Project-Based Learning (PBL) and Design Thinking is crucial in Maker Education. These approaches encourage students to solve problems and think creatively in practical situations. Studying the impact of these methods helps to understand how they contribute to student engagement, collaboration, and problem-solving skills. These approaches align well with the philosophy of Maker Education, which focuses on applying knowledge rather than just transferring it.
2. Research on Technological Integration in Education
In Maker Education, technology plays a central role. From 3D printing to working with Microbit and Arduino, technology allows students to turn their ideas into tangible products. Research on the effectiveness of technology in education helps understand how tools and digital platforms contribute to the learning experience. This research can also provide insights into how technology enhances the development of digital literacy, which is becoming increasingly important in today’s society.
3. Research on Metacognition and Self-Regulation
In Maker Education, students are given significant autonomy, which requires self-direction and metacognition (the ability to monitor one’s learning process). Research on self-regulation and how students can take ownership of their learning is essential. It helps understand how Maker Education encourages students to take responsibility for their learning. This is crucial for their development, not just as learners, but also as future citizens capable of making their own decisions and solving problems independently.
4. Research on Collaboration and Social Interaction
Collaboration is a key aspect of Maker Education. Working on joint projects encourages social interaction and peer feedback, enriching the learning experience. Research on the impact of collaboration can provide insights into how students learn from each other and how working together enhances their problem-solving skills. This is valuable not only for academic performance but also for developing social and communication skills.
5. Research on Impact on Academic Performance
Finally, it is important to research how Maker Education affects academic performance. Studies that demonstrate the impact of hands-on learning on the development of cognitive skills can further support the value of Maker Education. It is essential to research both the effect on traditional academic performance and the development of non-cognitive skills such as creative thinking and perseverance.
6. Self-Determination Theory and Motivation in Maker Education
Richard M. Deci’s research on Self-Determination Theory (SDT) can provide important insights into Maker Education. According to SDT, intrinsic motivation thrives when students feel that they have autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In Maker Education, students often have the autonomy to choose projects, work at their own pace, and make decisions about how they approach tasks. This supports their intrinsic motivation, encouraging them to take ownership of their learning. Deci’s research emphasizes that when students are motivated intrinsically, they are more likely to engage deeply and persist in tasks. The hands-on, project-based nature of Maker Education aligns with these principles, making it a powerful tool for fostering motivation and long-term engagement in students.
7. Invent to Learn: Supporting Hands-on Learning
A particularly influential resource in the Maker Education space is Invent to Learn by Gary Stager and Sylvia Martinez. This book highlights the value of hands-on, project-based learning and emphasizes how making, tinkering, and coding can help students develop important life skills. The book draws on research and practical examples to show how learning by making fosters deeper understanding and engagement. Stager and Martinez argue that students who are involved in making and creating are more likely to develop problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity. Invent to Learn reinforces the importance of integrating technology and engineering principles into education, making it a valuable resource for educators looking to support innovation in their classrooms.
More background:
I am a Dutch educational scientist and an (I think) expert in maker education, innovation, and learning by doing. In the Netherlands, I co-developed the subject Innovation & Prototyping with a colleague. My focus is on the role of attitude and mindset in education because I believe that education is not just about transferring knowledge but about fostering curiosity, ownership, and creative thinking.
My vision is strongly influenced by thinkers such as John Dewey, Seymour Papert, Paulo Freire, and Paul de Blot. To me, maker education is not a method or an end goal but a way of looking at learning: students and teachers explore, experiment, fail, and improve together. This requires a shift in the teacher’s role—less directive, more facilitative—which can be challenging.
I write and speak about these topics and advocate for a stronger place for maker education and design thinking in schools. I see technology not as an end in itself but as a tool to enable better education, always keeping the focus on human development and connection.
Why is maker education so difficult to implement? I believe it has a lot to do with control. Traditional education is built on predictability: teachers define the learning goals, the methods, and the outcomes. But maker education holds up a mirror to teachers. How comfortable are you with letting go, with uncertainty, with giving students the space to discover for themselves? That can feel vulnerable because it also reflects your own skills as an educator.
Find more at website: www.innovatieenprototyping.nl.
Reliable References List (and more)
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some early research findings. Educational Media International, 37(3), 163-168.
Stager, G., & Martinez, S. (2013). Invent to Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press
Deci, R. M., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
 | A guest post by
|