Déroulement et retombées de projets bricoleur (maker) à l’élémentaire : une revue de la portée

Auteurs-es

  • Megan Cotnam-Kappel Université d'Ottawa
  • Alison Cattani-Nardelli l’Université d’Ottawa
  • Sima Neisary l’Université d’Ottawa
  • Patrick R. Labelle l’Université d’Ottawa

DOI :

https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28608

Mots-clés :

bricoleur, formation enseignante, maker, revue de la portée, technologies éducatives

Résumé

Le mouvement bricoleur (maker) connaît une popularité croissante dans les écoles du monde entier, mais la recherche, en particulier en français, est encore à un stade émergent. Cet article propose une revue de la portée des projets bricoleur dans les salles de classe de la 4e à la 8e année (secondaire 2) à l’échelle internationale, qui vise à analyser leurs descriptions, le déroulement, les outils utilisés et les retombées sur les élèves et le personnel enseignant. Sur 1 900 études initialement recensées et 68 articles scientifiques retenus aux fins d’analyse, l’étude définit trois phases principales des projets bricoleur : 1) l’inspiration et la préparation, 2) la mise en œuvre et la réalisation, et 3) la présentation et la recontextualisation, et elle souligne l’équilibre entre les outils numériques et physiques dans les études du corpus. Elle examine aussi les retombées sur les élèves à travers les dimensions affectives, sociales, disciplinaires et métacognitives, ainsi que sur le personnel en ce qui a trait aux dimensions pédagogiques, affectives et sociales. Des exemples de projets bricoleur disciplinaires, interdisciplinaires et transdisciplinaires sont présentés, illustrant l’ampleur et le potentiel du mouvement bricoleur. Ces résultats sont essentiels pour renforcer la formation enseignante, en s’appuyant sur les recommandations issues de recherches récentes, afin de favoriser la conception et l’intégration de projets bricoleur dans les salles de classe.

Bibliographies de l'auteur-e

Megan Cotnam-Kappel, Université d'Ottawa

Megan Cotnam-Kappel, Ph.D., est professeure agrégée en technologies éducatives à la Faculté d’éducation de l’Université d’Ottawa. Titulaire de la Chaire de recherche sur l’épanouissement numérique des communautés franco-ontariennes, ses recherches touchent les littératies et la citoyenneté numériques, la formation enseignante et les pédagogies orientées vers l’équité et le bricolage.

Alison Cattani-Nardelli, l’Université d’Ottawa

Allison Cattani-Nardelli est diplômée de l’Université d’Ottawa, a étudié la littérature et l’entrepreneuriat avant d’effectuer une maîtrise en éducation. Elle s’intéresse au mouvement bricoleur (maker), aux pédagogies alternatives, coopératives et ludiques, mais son travail concerne plus précisément les populations marginalisées, vivant en contexte minoritaire ou défavorisé.

Sima Neisary, l’Université d’Ottawa

Sima Neisary, Ph.D., est titulaire d’un doctorat de la Faculté d’éducation de l’Université d’Ottawa. Ses recherches portent sur les littératies numériques et les inégalités numériques, avec un intérêt particulier pour les apprenants de la langue anglaise et les immigrants/nouveaux arrivants. Elle cherche à amplifier les voix des apprenants de la langue anglaise et des nouveaux arrivants, en plaidant pour des opportunités éducatives inclusives et équitables afin de réduire les inégalités numériques pour ceux qui risquent d’être laissés pour compte.

Patrick R. Labelle, l’Université d’Ottawa

Patrick R. Labelle est bibliothécaire de recherche à l’Université d’Ottawa. Il travaille sur des projets de synthèse des connaissances principalement en sciences sociales et en éducation, en collaboration avec des chercheurs et des étudiants diplômés. Il est également spécialiste de l’information au sein de la Campbell Collaboration et co-instructeur à l’Evidence Synthesis Institute Canada.

Références

Albers, B., & Pattuwage, L. (2017). Implementation in education: Findings from a scoping review. Evidence for Learning, 10.

Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

Assaf, L. C., Pakamile, P., & Brooks, J. (2021). Superheroes and community innovators: Opportunities to engage in critical literacy in a makerspace camp in rural South Africa. Language Arts, 98(6), 315–329. https://doi.org/10.58680/la202131331

Barton, A. C., Tan, E., & Greenberg, D. (2017). The makerspace movement : Sites of possibilities for equitable opportunities to engage underrepresented youth in STEM. Teachers College Record, 119(6), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711900608

Becker, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2019). How can I build a model if I don’t know the answer to the question? : Developing student and teacher sky scientist ontologies through making. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(Suppl 1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09953-8

Becker, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2021). A year at the improv: The evolution of teacher and student identity in an elementary school makerspace. Teaching Education, 34(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2021.1978968

Bevan, B. (2017). The promise and the promises of making in science education. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 75–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380

Bevan, B., Ryoo, J. J., Vanderwerff, A., Wilkinson, K., & Petrich, M. (2020). I see students differently : Following the lead of maker educators in defining what counts as learning. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00121

Bishop, R., & Lepou, S. (2018). How can a makerspace in the school setting support increased motivation, engagement, and achievement for Pasifika and Māori learners? Set. Research Information for Teachers, 1, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0098

Blais, M., & Martineau, S. (2006). L’analyse inductive générale : description d’une démarche visant à donner un sens à des données brutes. Recherches qualitatives, 26(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.7202/1085369ar

Bosqué, C. (2015). Des FabLabs dans les marges : détournements et appropriations. Journal des anthropologues, 3(142–143), 49–76. https://doi.org/10.4000/jda.6207

Bosqué, C., Noor, O., & Ricard, L. (2014). Fablabs, etc. Les nouveaux lieux de fabrication numérique. Eyrolles.

Buchholz, B., Shively, K., Peppler, K., & Wohlwend, K. (2014). Hands on, hands off: Gendered access in crafting and electronics practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(4), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2014.939762

Bull, G., Schmidt-Crawford, D. A., McKenna, M. C., & Cohoon, J. (2017). Storymaking: Combining making and storytelling in a school makerspace. Theory into Practice, 56(4), 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1348114

Caratachea, M. X., Greene, M. D., & Jones, W. M. (2023). Maker-centered professional learning for inservice and preservice K-12 educators: A systematic literature review. TechTrends, 67, 648–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00865-7

Chen, C.-S., & Lin, J.-W. (2019). A practical action research study of the impact of maker-centered STEM-PjBL on a rural middle school in Taiwan. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(Suppl 1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09961-8

Chu, S. L., Angello, G., Saenz, M., & Quek, F. (2017). Fun in Making: Understanding the experience of fun and learning through curriculum-based Making in the elementary school classroom. Entertainment Computing, 18, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2016.08.007

Clapp, E., Ross, J., Ryan, J. O., & Tishman, S. (2017). Maker-centered learning. Empowering young people to shape their worlds. Jossey-Bass.

Cotnam-Kappel, M., Hagerman, M., & Duplàa, E. (2020). La formation bricoleur : un modèle informé par les expériences et voix du personnel enseignant. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 46(1), 117–150. https://doi.org/10.7202/1070729ar

Dalton, B. (2020). Bringing together multimodal composition and maker education in K–8 classrooms. Language Arts, 97(3), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.58680/la202030415

Davidson, A.-L., & Price, D. W. (2018). Does your school have the maker fever? An experiential learning approach to developing maker competencies. LEARNing Landscapes, 11(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v11i1.926

Friend, L., & Mills, K. A. (2021). Towards a typology of touch in multisensory makerspaces. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(4), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1928695

Fu, Y., Zhang, D., & Jiang, H. (2022). Students’ attitudes and competences in modeling using 3D cartoon toy design maker. Sustainability, 14(4), 2176. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042176

Geser, G., Hollauf, E.-M., Hornung-Prähauser, V., Schön, S., & Vloet, F. (2019). Makerspaces as social innovation and entrepreneurship learning environments: The DOIT learning program. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 10(2), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2019-0018

Godhe, A. L., Lilja, P., & Selwyn, N. (2019). Making sense of making: Critical issues in the integration of maker education into schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1610040

Hagerman, M. S. (2017). Les Bricoscientifiques: Exploring the intersections of disciplinary, digital, and maker literacies instruction in a Franco-Ontarian School. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(3), 319–325. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26631130

Hagerman, M. S., Cotnam-Kappel, M., Turner, J., & Hughes, J. (2022). Literacies in the Making: A descriptive study of three fifth-grade students’ digital-physical meaning-making practices while crafting musical instruments from recycled materials. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 3(1), 63–84. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epub/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1997794?needAccess=true

Halverson, E., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.34j1g68140382063

Hansen, A. K., McBeath, J. K., & Harlow, D. B. (2019). No bones about it: How digital fabrication changes student perceptions of their role in the classroom. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 9(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1155

Harlow, D., & Hansen, A. (2018). School maker faires. Science and Children, 55(7), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc18_055_07_30

Hébert, C., & Jenson, J. (2020). Making in schools: Student learning through an e-textiles curriculum. Discourse, 41(5), 740–761. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1769937

Herro, D., Quigley, C., & Abimbade, O. (2021a). Assessing elementary students’ collaborative problem-solving in makerspace activities. Information and Learning Science, 122(11/12), 774–794. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-08-2020-0176

Herro, D., Quigley, C., Plank, H., & Abimbade, O. (2021b). Understanding students’ social interactions during making activities designed to promote computational thinking. The Journal of Educational Research, 114(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1884824

Holbert, N. (2016). Leveraging cultural values and « ways of knowing » to increase diversity in maker activities. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 9–10, 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2016.10.002

Hollweck, T., Cotnam-Kappel, M., Hargreaves, A., & Boultif, A. (2023). Des écoles se prennent au jeu après la pandémie : le réseau canadien des écoles ludiques. Magazine EdCan. https://www.edcan.ca/articles/des-ecoles-se-prennent-au-jeu-apres-la-pandemie/?lang=fr

Hsu, P.-S., Lee, E. M., Ginting, S., Smith, T. J., & Kraft, C. (2019). A case study exploring non-dominant youths’ attitudes toward science through making and scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(Suppl 1), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09997-w

Hughes, J., Morrison, L., Mamolo, A., Laffier, J., & de Castell, S. (2019). Addressing bullying through critical making. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12714

Hughes, J. M. (2017). Digital making with « at-risk » youth. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 34(2), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-08-2016-0037

Iivari, N., Kinnula, M., & Molin-Juustila, T. (2018). You have to start somewhere: Initial meanings making in a design and making project. Dans Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children (p. 80–92). https://doi.org/10.1145/3202185.3202742

Iwata, M., Pitkänen, K., Laru, J., & Mäkitalo, K. (2020). Exploring potentials and challenges to develop twenty-first century skills and computational thinking in K-12 maker education. Frontiers in Education, 5, 87. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00087

Jin, Y., & Harron, J. R. (2022). Maker education infusion in educator preparation programs: A 2025 vision for technology and teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 30(2), 265–274. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/221081/

Kajamaa, A., & Kumpulainen, K. (2019). Agency in the making: Analyzing students’ transformative agency in a school-based makerspace. Mind, Culture and Activity, 26(3), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2019.1647547

Ke, F., Clark, K. M., & Uysal, S. (2019). Architecture game-based mathematical learning by making. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(Suppl 1), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09996-x

Kendrick, M., Namazzi, E., Becker-Zayas, A., & Tibwamulala, E. N. (2020). Closing the HIV and AIDS « information gap » between children and parents: An exploration of makerspaces in a Ugandan primary school. Education Sciences, 10(8), 193. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10080193

Kumpulainen, K., Kajamaa, A., Leskinen, J., Byman, J., & Renlund, J. (2020). Mapping digital competence: Students’ maker literacies in a school’s makerspace. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00069

Leinonen, T., Virnes, M., Hietala, I., & Brinck, J. (2020). 3D printing in the wild: Adopting digital fabrication in elementary school education. The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(3), 600–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12310

Martin, W. B., Yu, J., Wei, X., Vidiksis, R., Patten, K. K., & Riccio, A. (2020). Promoting science, technology, and engineering self-efficacy and knowledge for all with an autism inclusion maker program. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00075

Martinez, S. L., & Stager, G. (2013). Invent to learn. Making, tinkering and engineering in the classroom. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.

McGowan, J., Sampson, M., Salzwedel, D. M., Cogo, E., Foerster, V., & Lefebvre, C. (2016). PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 75, 40–46.

Montgomery, S., & Madden, L. (2019). Novel engineering: Integrating literacy and engineering design in a fifth grade classroom. Science Activities, 56(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2019.1638744

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic reviews or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18. https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Murai, Y., & San Juan, A. Y. (2023). Making as an opportunity for classroom assessment: Canadian maker educators’ views on assessment. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 39, 100631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100631

Mylonas, G., Amaxilatis, D., Pocero, L., Markelis, I., & Hofstaetter, J. (2019). An educational IoT lab kit and tools for energy awareness in European schools. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 20, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.03.003

Ng, O.-L., & Chan, T. (2019). Learning as making: Using 3D computer-aided design to enhance the learning of shape and space in STEM-integrated ways. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12643

Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2017). Empirical studies on the Maker Movement, a promising approach to learning: A literature review. Entertainment Computing, 18, 57–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2016.09.002

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

Parent, S., Michaud, O., Davidson, A. L., Sanabria, J., & Artemova, I. (2022). Apprentissage non formel dans quatre espaces créatifs québécois : analyse basée sur la théorie de l’activité. Revue internationale du CRIRES. Innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky, 6(3), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.51657/ric.v6i2.51549

Peters, M., Godfrey, C., Mclnerey, P., Baldini Soares, C., Khalil, H., & Parker, D. (2015). Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual. 2015 Edition. The Joanna Briggs Institute.

Ramey, K. E., & Stevens, R. (2019). Interest development and learning in choice-based, in-school, making activities: The case of a 3D printer. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23, 100262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.11.009

Riikonen, S. M., Kangas, K., Kokko, S., Korhonen, T., Hakkareinen, K., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2020). The development of pedagogical infrastructures in three cycles of maker-centered learning projects. Design and Technology Education. An International Journal, 25(2), 29–49.

Rodriguez, S. R., Harron, J. R., & DeGraff, M. W. (2018). UTeach Maker: A micro-credentialing program for preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(1), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1387830

Rouse, R., & Gillespie Rouse, A. (2022). Taking the maker movement to school: A systematic review of preK-12 school-based makerspace research. Educational Research Review, 35, 100413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100413

Schad, M., & Jones, W. M. (2020). The maker movement and education: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(1), 65 -78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1688739

Searle, K. A., Fields, D. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2016). Is sewing a « girl’s sport »? Addressing gender issues in making with electronic textiles. Dans K. Peppler, E. Halverson, et Y. B. Kafai M. (dir.), Makeology. Makers as Learners, vol. 2 (p. 72 -84). Routledge.

Thanapornsangsuth, S., & Holbert, N. (2020). Culturally relevant constructionist design: Exploring the role of community in identity development. Information and Learning Science, 121(11/12), 847–867. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-02-2020-0024

Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748

Tofel-Grehl, C., Jex, E., Searle, K., Ball, D., Zhao, X., & Burnell, G. (2020). Electrifying: One teacher’s discursive and instructional changes through engagement in e-textiles to teach science content. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20(2), 293–314. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/213819/

Tricco, A.-C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K.-K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M.-D., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Aki, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Harling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., et al. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) : Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

Trust, T., & Maloy, R. W. (2018). Makerspaces and 3D printing: New directions for history learning. Social Education, 82(2), 101–106.

Vossoughi, S., & Bevan, B. (2014). Making and tinkering: A review of the literature. National Research Council Committee on Out of School Time STEM, 67, 1–55.

Vossoughi, S., Hooper, P. K., & Escudé, M. (2016). Making through the lens of culture and power: Toward transformative visions for educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 86(2), 206–232. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.86.2.206

Weng, X., Cui, Z., Ng, O.-L., Jong, M. S. Y., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2022). Characterizing students’ 4C skills development during problem-based digital making. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(3), 372–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09961-4

Wright, L., Shaw, D., Gaidds, K., Lyman, G., & Sorey, T. (2018). 3D pit stop printing. Science and Children, 55(7), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc18_055_07_55

Téléchargements

Publié-e

2024-11-01