Much like design thinking, constructionism is a movement that encourages students to get hands-on with their classroom projects, and create something tangible, with roots in constructionism (Donaldson, 2014; Martinez & Stager, 2014). Due to its open-ended nature, there is no limit to how teachers can use activities rooted in constructionism and the maker movement to foster creativity in their students.
Activities that are based in a constructionist learning environment will likely span over a number of lessons, due to the need for prototyping fixing flaws in an initial design. This is exactly what happened in EDUC3620 tutorials; students were given the opportunity to re-design prototypes from back in Week 3. This time, however, students were able to get hands-on with the micro:bit, and get to learn exactly how it can be used.
Describing itself as “a pocket-sized computer transforming the world” (micro:bit, n.d.), the micro:bit can be used in a variety of ways, which requires students to develop their coding skills in order to code the correct sequences for the micro:bit to do its job. In the NSW Science and Technology syllabus, ST3-3DP-T requires Stage 3 students to “define problems, and design, modify and follow algorithms to develop solutions” (NESA, 2017, p. 16). This task encourages students to design algorithms to ensure their prototype can function in the way it had been planned to do so.
Because of the nature of the Maker Movement, there is no limit to how student creativity can be fostered. Students are required to think of different ways to make their prototype move, and different ways to build their prototypes to ensure they are meeting their vision.
There are certainly limitations to using the micro:bit in the classroom. The coding can be incredibly complicated at times, and may cause students to lose interest or become incredibly frustrated if they do not understand what they are doing.
That being said, the ideals of the Maker Movement can still be completed without using a micro:bit if it is too complicated for them. Students can design, create, and test prototypes that are made through their own manipulation, rather than using a device to manipulate their creations.
CC by Ashleigh Norsa
References
Donaldson, J. P. (2014, January 23). The maker movement and the rebirth of constructionism.
Hybrid Pedagogy. https://hybridpedagogy.org/constructionism-reborn/
Martinez, S. L., & Stager, G. S. (2014). The maker movement: A learning revolution. Learning
& Leading with Technology, 41(7), 12-17.
micro:bit (n.d.). BBC micro:bit. https://microbit.org/
Hi Ashleigh,
Your blog post provides a great framing of constructivism that enables your further discussions. I think the syllabus link is very appropriate and the use of micro:bit's fits in so well with the designing and producing skills within the K-6 Science and Technology Syllabus. Your integration of images and the video into the blog is seamless and flows very well. The discussion of limitations makes me curious as to how the coding could be more accessible to students, maybe through the use of scaffolding?
To further improve your blog I wonder if more findings and viewpoints could have been included in the initial discussion.
Great work!
Calum Byers.
Hi Ashleigh,
What an amazing post! I really like how you have provided a very detailed explanation about constructionism and how it fosters students' creativity in the classroom. You've also mentioned how it links with the Maker Movement which is highly beneficial for aiding teachers in understanding the concepts. The links to the syllabus were also very good because it displays how using Microbit is beneficial for student learning. I really like how you have provided detailed information on coding however, I think it would be good to include a coding program that students can use for the activity you mentioned e.g. MakeCode. Overall, it is a really enjoyable and informative blog to read.
Thanks,
Olivia Spanswick
12/04/23
Hi Ashleigh,
Thank you for opening with a paragraph that explains a little bit about constructionism with research to support your statements. Really good use of personal footage, everything was well labelled. You clearly identified the microbit as your chosen piece of technology for this post, however, it would have been nice to have other comparisons for context purposes. I can also see that you have made reference to the NSW syllabus, with a specific outcome to be taught in a classroom. I personally would have liked an explanation of a lesson plan to see how this outcome could be executed in the classroom. You have put in a blurb about fostering creativity in the classroom, but it may also…
Hi Ashleigh! You have made an incredible post while highlighting the maker movement's implications and features! I especially enjoy how you have utilised the scientific notion of evaluation and redesign of the work so students can use hands-on construction to consolidate and actualise their understanding. I specifically enjoyed how you evaluated the Micro: bit as an effective tool for students to learn about coding while displaying some valid limitations, including the time that it takes. I think that teachers and students will enjoy this tool a lot as students can make something tangible with a physical object rather than displaying concepts on a screen! One thing I would like to add is the program MakeCode within your blog should probably be mentioned, as…
Hi Ashleigh,
this blog post is written very fluently and easy to read and comprehend. I think you've provided great sources that add to your post. The visual images and video add to the fluency and make your blog engaging. Great links to the syllabus aswell.
Amanda