Educating designers with 3D printers - a postphenomenological perspective on maker and design pedagogy

Oct 15, 2026

Learning in makerspaces, free from curriculum and evaluation, is expected to foster practical, self-driven, solution-oriented learners. This study examines how makerspace pedagogy can be emulated in formal higher education through action research in three repeated design studio courses with a 3D printing lab. Maker pedagogy is analyzed as supporting self-driven learning through relationships among learners, social environments, and technological media, further framed by postphenomenology and learners’ adoption of 3D printers. Results discuss limitations and opportunities, and argue that shifting from constructivist to postphenomenological concepts strengthens sustainable practices.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction: emulating makerspace qualities in formal education

Maker pedagogy in the design studio in formal education

Educating designers with 3D printers: a postphenomenological perspective on maker and design pedagogy Nenad Pavel, Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway Abstract Learning in makerspaces is free from curriculum and evaluation and is believed to yield practical, self-driven and solution-oriented learners. This study explores how makerspace pedagogy can be emulated in formal higher education settings to support this kind of learning. Action research was used to cultivate and review this pedagogical approach in three repeated design studio courses using three-dimensional (3D) printing lab. The maker pedagogy was to support self-driven learning emerging in relationship between learners, their social environment and technology media. Maker and design pedagogy has been further theoretically developed using postphenomenology as a process of learners’ adoption of 3D printers in own design practice, learners’ adaptation to the affordances of the 3D printers, and attainment of learners’ own goals in social contexts using 3D printing technology. Finally, the study indicateshow shifting from constructivist to postphenomenological theoretical concepts can give new insights and strengthen sustainable pedagogical practices. Limitations and opportunities for maker pedagogy in formal education are addressed with these new insights. Keywords Technological Media, Design Pedagogy, Maker Pedagogy, Postphenomenology, 3D print. Introduction: emulating makerspace qualities in formal education The emergence of alternative informal education, such as makerspaces, has drawn the attention of educators. Some formal study programs in the field of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics have seized the opportunity to borrow some makerspace learning qualities. As a result, makerspace workshops have been established at universities with the promise to encourage an experimental and hands-on approach to learning. The existing literature (Ford & Minshall 2019) has shown many of these attempts to integrate makerspace pedagogy to increase student engagement, motivation, curriculum implementation, and learning efficiency. Benefits have also been noted to include increased student creativity, especially the ability to ‘define problems’ and ‘design solutions’ as core engineering practices (Quinn & Bell 2013) . Accordingly, this kind of thinking is important for learners’‘individual agency and can foster learners’ autonomy’ (45) . However, researchers such as Godhe, [et.al](et.al)., (2019) have scrutinized these claims due to the issues arising from attempts to emulate makerspace learning approaches in formal education. They question the promise of maker-based education and called for research on not only successful cases of the implementation of maker technology and pedagogy in formal education but also those producing average and failed results. Their paper addresses issues and proposes both the reconfiguration of maker technologies and calls for new ideas for ‘alternative conceptual pedagogical frameworks that move beyond the narrow concerns of maker education’ (11) that can fit formal education in a more effective way. Of the issues raised in this paper, I would like to outline and elaborate on two. The first issue involves curricula or learning content. Maker movements rest on the free endeavors of their participants, who learn through play in a social setting and freely explore what interests them (Martin 2015) . Therefore, learning through maker technologies, according to some theoreticians (Martin 2015; Bevan 2017), should facilitate learners’ agency by freeing them from curriculum and instruction. Furthermore, it should be process-oriented and participatory, with unpredictable outcomes, and should transfer the learning responsibility to learners. If this is to happen outside the makerspace setting and be transferred to the formal educational setting, the challenge becomes planning the curriculum. Thus, we must ask how learners choo

FAQs

What is the main goal of the study described in the abstract?

To explore how makerspace pedagogy can be emulated in formal higher education settings to support practical, self-driven, solution-oriented learning.

How was the maker pedagogy approach developed and evaluated?

Through action research cultivating and reviewing the approach in three repeated design studio courses using a 3D printing lab.

What theoretical shift does the study suggest for strengthening pedagogy?

It indicates that shifting from constructivist to postphenomenological theoretical concepts can provide new insights and strengthen sustainable pedagogical practices.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by RuangKosong