Advertisement

In pursuit of learning in an informal space: a case study in the Singapore context

  • Aik Lim TanEmail author
  • Azilawati Jamaludin
  • David Hung
Article
First Online:
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

This paper explores the dimensions of how interest can be sustained in learners, using a case study of a makerspace in a Singapore context. We suggest a framework that synthesises both individual psychological aspects of interest development together with the impact of the socio-cultural environment which include five dimensions: community, culture, confidence, conflict resolution, recreating process. Based on a biblio-narrativical approach, we obtained data via interviews and field observations of students in the makerspace. The data obtained was able to substantiate our hypothesis of the impact the dimensions have on interest sustainability, emphasising the importance of a positive socio-cultural environment in interest development and sustainability. This has implications on the role stakeholders such as school management, teachers, peers and parents, have on an individual’s interest development. The unification of psychological and socio-cultural aspects of interest development would provide a more comprehensive perspective on interest development and sustainability which would benefit both practitioners and researchers.

Keywords

Interest development Situational interest Individual interest Informal learning Singapore Makerspace 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by National Institute of Education (SG).

References

  1. Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology,94(3), 545–561.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajam, G., & Lee, E. (2016). A Singapore school’s journey towards maker education. Paper presented at the Regional Industry Networking Conference, Singapore.Google Scholar
  3. Azevedo, F. S. (2011). Lines of practice: A practice-centered theory of interest relationships. Cognition and Instruction,29(2), 147–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology,52(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  5. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development,49(4), 193–224.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000094368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clandinin, D. (2006). Narrative inquiry: A methodology for studying lived experience. Research Studies in Music Education,27(1), 44–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Cleaves, A. (2005). The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education,27(4), 471–486.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  10. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist,48(2), 90–101.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.2.90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans, M. A., Lopez, M., Maddox, D., Drape, T., & Duke, R. (2014). Interest-driven learning among middle school youth in an out-of-school STEM studio. Journal of Science Education and Technology,23(5), 624–640.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9490-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferguson, R., Faulkner, D., Whitelock, D., & Sheehy, K. (2015). Pre-teens’ informal learning with ICT and Web 2.0. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,24(2), 247–265.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.870596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greenhow, C., & Lewin, C. (2016). Social media and education: Reconceptualising the boundaries of formal and informal learning. Learning, Media and Technology,41(1), 6–30.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1064954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Informal learning and identity formation in online social networks. Learning, Media and Technology,34(2), 119–140.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880902923580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York, NY: McMillan.Google Scholar
  17. Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review,84(4), 495–504.  https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.34j1g68140382063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist,41(2), 111–127.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology,102(4), 880–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hung, D., Lim, S. H., & Jamaludin, A. (2011). Social constructivism, projective identity, and learning: Case study of nathan. Asia Pacific Education Review,12, 161–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jamaludin, A. (2017). Innovations in education for a future-ready nation. In Keynote address at the 14th international conference on research in science and technology. Singapore: Nanyang Executive Centre.Google Scholar
  22. Joeffe, H. (2012). Thematic analysis. In D. Harper & A. R. Thompson (Eds.), Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy (pp. 209–223). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. Kim, S., Jiang, Y., & Song, J. (2015). The effect of interest and utility on mathematics engagement and achievement. In K. A. Renninger, M. Nieswandt, & S. Hidi (Eds.), Interest in mathematics and science learning (pp. 63–78). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolodner, J. L. (2004). The learning sciences: Past, present, and future. Educational Technology: The Magazine for Managers of Changes in Education,44(3), 37–42.Google Scholar
  25. Krapp, A. (2003). Interest and human development: An educational-psychological perspective. British Journal of Educational Psychology (Monograph Series II, Part 2),2, 57–84.Google Scholar
  26. Lee, H. L. (2014). Review time spent on CCAs. The Straits Times, Forum (p. A21).Google Scholar
  27. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lipstein, R., & Renninger, K. A. (2007). “Putting things into words”: 12–15-year-old students’ interest for writing. In P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Eds.), Motivation and writing: Research and school practice (pp. 113–140). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  29. Marcu, G., Tassini, K., Carlson, Q., Goodwyn, J., Rivkin, G., Schaefer, K.J., & Kiesler, S. (2013). Why do they still use paper? Understanding data collection and use in Autism education. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3177–3186). ACM.Google Scholar
  30. Ministry of Education Singapore. (2015). 21st Century Competencies. Retrieved June 10, 2019, from https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/education-system/21st-century-competencies.
  31. Ministry of Education Singapore. (2019). Courses and subjects for secondary schools. Retrieved September 9, 2019, from https://beta.moe.gov.sg/secondary/courses/.
  32. Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology,85(3), 424–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ng, K. (2016). ‘Makerspaces’ allow students to get messy—and creative. Today. Retrieved May 8, 2019, from http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/makerspaces-allow-students-get-messy-and-creative.
  34. Nolen, S. B. (2007). The role of literate communities in the development of children’s interest in writing. In P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Eds.), Motivation and writing: Research and school practice (pp. 241–255). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  35. Pressick-Kilborn, K., & Walker, R. (2002). The social construction of interest in a learning community. In D. McInerney & S. van Etten (Eds.), Sociocultural influences on motivation and learning (pp. 153–182). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2016). The power of interest for motivation and engagement. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Reynolds, R., & Chiu, M. M. (2013). Formal and informal context factors as contributors to student engagement in a guided discovery-based program of game design learning. Learning, Media and Technology,38(4), 429–462.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.779585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sahin, A., Ayar, M. C., & Adiguzel, T. (2014). STEM related after-school program activities and associated outcomes on student learning. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice,14(1), 309–322.  https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sansone, C. C., Fraughton, T., Zachary, J., Butner, J., & Heiner, C. (2011). Self-regulation of motivation when learning online: The importance of who, why and how. Educational Technology Research and Development,59(2), 199–212.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9193-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schank, R. C. (1979). Interestingness: Controlling inferences. Artificial Intelligence,12, 273–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist,26(3–4), 299–323.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest and learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading,3(3), 257–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tan, E. (2013). Informal Learning on YouTube: Exploring digital literacy in independent online learning. Learning, Media and Technology,38(4), 463–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tan, A. L., Hung, D., & Jamaludin, A. (2019). Exploring the dimensions of interest sustainability (5Cs Framework): Case study of Nathan. In D. Hung, S. S. Lee, Y. Toh, A. Jamaludin, & L. Wu (Eds.), Innovations in educational change. Education Innovation Series (pp. 253–276). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  45. Teng, A., & Yang, C. (2016). Going beyond grades: Evolving the Singapore education system. The Straits Times. Retrieved March 12, 2019, from http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/going-beyond-grades-evolving-the-singapore-education-system.
  46. United Nations Organization for Education, Science and Culture. (2012). UNESCO guidelines for the recognition, validation and accreditation of the outcomes of non-formal and informal learning. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Retrieved March 1, 2019, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002163/216360e.pdf.
  47. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology,25, 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Office of Education Research, Centre for Research in Pedagogy and PracticeNational Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Office of Education ResearchNational Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options