Abstract:

Pedagogical makerspaces have been inspired by the maker movement which has experienced a new upswing with the magazine MAKE, the digitalisation of the society and the social media since around 2005 (Martin, 2015). Making is considered a purely intrinsic motivated process. Intrinsically motivated activities have been associated with successful learning due to a deeper examination with the learning topic (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

The work in our pedagogical makerspace CoLiLab (Lukas et al., 2019; Max et al., 2020) begins with the formulation of an open task or problem, which the students choose based on their subject-specific interests. The work process itself usually takes place in small groups of two or three students in an individual work pace. It is highly interactive and cooperative. Continuous feedback of peers or lecturers supports this process. Under the conditions described, pedagogical makerspaces represent ideal learning environments for initiating learning processes with a constructivist structure (e.g., Bevan, 2017; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996).

On the other hand, the outlined work process poses challenges to students on several levels which, according to Geramanis (2020), can be divided into the categories of framework, task work and teamwork which can hamper the successful completion of making projects in the Makerspaces.
At the conference, we would like to present how the use of agile project management methods (based on SCRUM; Sutherland, 2019) can support students of science teacher education in organising their projects. In addition, they will learn about agile project management, a method they can also use later to implement projects in school lessons.

References:
[1] 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
[2] Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. NY: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
[3] Geramanis, O., & Hutmacher, S. (2020). Der Mensch in der Selbstorganisation: Kooperationskonzepte für eine dynamische Arbeitswelt. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27048-3
[4] Lukas, S., Müller, W., Huwer, J., Drüke-Noe, C., Koppel, I., Rebholz, S., Stratmann, J., Theilmann, F., & Weitzel, H. (2019). Improving students’ TPACK through learning labs: The implementation of IChemLab and STEAM Makerspace. EDULEARN19 Proceedings, 6718–6726. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2019.1611
[5] Martin, L. (2015). The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1099
[6] Max, A. L., Schmoll, I., Uhl, P., Huwer, J., Lukas, S., Mueller, W., & Weitzel, H. (2020). Integration of a teaching-learning lab and a pedagogical makerspace into a module for media education for STEAM teacher students. Proceedings of the INTED, 2050–2059. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2020.0645
[7] Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic moti-vation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
[8] Sutherland, J.J. (2019). The Scrum Fieldbook: A Master Class on Accelerating Performance, Getting Results, and Defining the Future (Englisch) Gebundene Ausgabe – 1. Oktober 2019. Currency

Keywords:

Media project, pedagogical Makerspace, student teachers, agile project management.