Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Tug-of-War: the Pull of Formal Institutional Practices and Structures and the Desire for Personal Change

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This scholarship utilized self-study methodology to examine the first author’s experience as a non-formal educator and non-formal teacher educator within the context of making and tinkering with elementary-aged students and university students. Through analysis of multiple forms of data, tensions arose and took shape through my interactions with both sets of students as we navigated and negotiated our roles and actions within two activity systems—a formal learning environment (i.e. university course) and a non-formal learning environment (i.e. the makerspace). These tensions included (a) the framing and implementation of the making task, (b) my authority and power as the making “expert” and teacher educator, and (c) undergraduate students’ lack of competence and knowledge in making and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The push and pull or tug-of-war of my personal existence within and between the 2 activity systems are highlighted within these tensions as my ways of being were bounded and constrained by formal schooling practices and structures. The tensions should challenge teacher educators to consider the role of non-formal educators in shaping how we work with students of all ages. This involves developing and maintaining shared practices, knowledges, and discourses (i.e. third space), and an understanding of how postmodern perspectives may uncover our notions of “education.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I, my, and myself will be used throughout the paper to reference the first author.

References

  • Anderson, A., Goeke, M., Simpson, A., & Maltese, A. V. (2019). Where should learners struggle? Connected Science Learning, 1(12). Retrieved at https://www.nsta.org/connected-science-learning/connected-science-learning-october-december-2019/where-should-learners

  • Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K., & Keating, T. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemic tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(2), 76–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, D., & Goldblatt, H. (2009). Learning to be a critical friend: From professional indifference through challenge to unguarded conversations. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640902902260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battelle for Kids. (2019). Framework of 21st century learning. Retrieved from https://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21/frameworks-resources. Accessed 14 Jan 2020.

  • 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, 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A. (2004). Self study in teaching about teaching. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 1295–1332). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

  • Berry, A. (2007). Reconceptualizing teacher educator knowledge as tensions: Exploring the tension between valuing and reconstructing experience. Studying Teacher Education, 3(2), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425960701656510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. London, England: Routledge.

  • Bourke, R., Mentis, M., & O’Neill, J. (2013). Analyzing tensions within a professional learning and development initiative for teachers. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(4), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, H., & Reason, P. (2003). Action research: An opportunity for revitalizing research purpose and practices. Qualitative Social Work, 2(2), 155–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, S. M., & Sator, A. (2018). Developing a pedagogy of “making” through collaborative self-study. Studying Teacher Education, 14(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2017.1413342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, S. M., & Sator, A. J. (2015). Maker pedagogy and science teacher education. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 13(1), 61–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullough Jr., R. V., & Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelines for quality in autobiographical forms of self-study research. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burris, A. (2017). A child's-eye view: An examination of point-of-view camera use in four informal education settings. Visitor Studies, 20(2), 218–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatard, A., & Selimbegović, L. (2011). When self-destructive thoughts flash through the mind: Failure to meet standards affects the accessibility of suicide-related thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(4), 587–605. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (2017). Maker principles and technologies in teacher education: A national survey. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(1), 5–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., Jones, W. M., & Smith, S. (2018). Preservice and early career teachers' preconceptions and misconceptions about making in education. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1387832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. M., Howes, A. J., & Farrell, P. (2008). Tensions and dilemmas as drivers for change in an analysis of joint working between teachers and educational psychologists. School Psychology International, 29(4), 400–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorie, B. L., Dankenbring, C. A., Denick, D. L., Ferguson, D., Huff, J., Phillips, C., Schimpf, C., & Cardella, M. E. (2012). FILE: A taxonomy of formal and informal learning environments. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education. Valparaiso, Indiana: Valparaiso University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R., & Usher, R. (1994). Postmodernism and education. London, England: Routledge.

  • Ellis, C., & Adams, T. E. (2014). The purposes, practices, and principles of autoethnographic research. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 254–276). Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press.

  • Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 64–103). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eshach, H. (2007). Bringing in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano-López, P., Alvarez, H., & Chiu, M. M. (1999). Building a culture of collaboration through hybrid language practices. Theory Into Practice, 38, 87–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. M. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppers, W. (2006). Non-formal education and basic education reform: A conceptual review. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyles, C. (1991). Developing mathematical knowledge through microworlds. In A. J. Bishop, S. Mellin-Olsen, & J. van Dormolen (Eds.), Mathematical knowledge: Its growth through teaching (pp. 147–172). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

  • Huang, C. H., & Lin, F. L. (2013). Using activity theory to model the Taiwan Atayal students’ classroom mathematical activity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 213–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelchtermans, G., & Hamilton, M. L. (2004). The dialects of passion and theory: Exploring the relation between self-study and emotion. In J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 785–810). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.

  • LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 817–870). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

  • Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. (2004). A history and context of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (Vol. 1, pp. 7–39). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Loughran, J., & Northfield, J. (1996). Opening the classroom door: Teacher, researcher, learner. London, England: Falmer Press.

  • Loughran, J. J., & Northfield, J. R. (1998). A framework for the development of self-study practice. In M. L. Hamilton et al. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education (pp. 7–18). London, England: Falmer Press.

  • Maltese, A., Simpson, A., & Anderson, A. (2018). Failing to learn: The impact of failures during making activities. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 30, 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.01.003

  • Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A. F., Giancaspro, M. L., & Morciano, D. (2015). Formal and informal learning in the workplace: A research review. International Journal of Training and Development, 19(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. (2015). The promise of the maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5(1), 30–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musoleno, R. R., & White, G. P. (2010). Influences of high-stakes testing on middle school mission and practice. RMLE Online, 34(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2010.11462076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New York State Education Department (2019). – elementary school enrollment (2017–2018). Retrieved from https://data.nysed.gov/. Accessed 2 May 2020.

  • Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 695–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rømer, T. A. (2011). Postmodern education and the concept of power. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(7), 755–772. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00566.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Lee, Y. J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654306298273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samaras, A. P., & Freese, A. R. (2009). Looking back and looking forward: An historical overview of the self-study school. In C. A. Lassonde, S. Galman, & C. Kosnik (Eds.), Self-study research methodologies for teacher educators (pp. 3–20). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

  • Sang, W., & Simpson, A. (2019). The maker movement: A global movement for educational change. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09960-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuk, S., & Russell, T. (2005). Studying teacher education: A journal of self-study, critical friendship, and the complexities of teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 1(2), 107–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, A. (2019). Being “challenged” and masking my own uncertainty: My parallel journey with elementary prospective teachers. Studying Teacher Education, 15(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2019.1587608

  • Simpson, A., Anderson, A., & Maltese, A. V. (2019a). Caught on camera: Youth and educators’ noticing of and responding to failure within making contexts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), 480–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09780-0

  • Simpson, A., Barnes, J., & Maltese, A. (2019b). A shared language: Two worlds speaking to one another through making and tinkering activities. In A. Sahin & M. Mohr-Schroeder (Eds.), Myths and Truths: What has years of K-12 STEM education research taught us? (pp. 228–1247). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Sense.

  • Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2009). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: Free Press.

  • Takahashi, N. (2003). Learning of disabled children in Japan: Simultaneous participation in different activity systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(4), 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, P., & Thorius, K. K. (2019). Toward equity in mathematics education for students with dis/abilities: A case study of professional learning. American Educational Research Journal, 56(3), 995–1032. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218811906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanassche, E., & Kelchtermans, G. (2015). The state of the art in self-study of teacher education practices: A systematic literature review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(4), 508–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.995712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, J. (1993). The growth of educational knowledge: Creating your own living educational theories. Bournemouth, England: Hyde Publications.

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003). Using activity theory as an analytic lens for examining technology professional development in schools. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(2), 100–119. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532-7884MCA1002_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2007). Confronting analytical dilemmas for understanding complex human interactions in design-based research from a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 451–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Haudenschild, M. T. (2009). Using activity systems analysis to identify inner contradictions in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the elementary students and school for allowing the first author to engage with them in their making space and further learn from this experience.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching, Learning, & Educational Leadership, Binghamton University – SUNY, Academic Building B, P.O. Box 6000, Binghamton, NY, 13902-6000, USA

    Amber Simpson & Michelle Feyerabend

Authors
  1. Amber Simpson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michelle Feyerabend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amber Simpson.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 23 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simpson, A., Feyerabend, M. Tug-of-War: the Pull of Formal Institutional Practices and Structures and the Desire for Personal Change. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 20, 149–168 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10139-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10139-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation