When making is a choice
Institutional framing and emotional experience across learning environments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32674/9ej04z07Keywords:
Affective conditions of making, emotional engagement, formal and informal learning environments, maker education, self-determination theory, STEM and design educationAbstract
Making is shaped by the institutional conditions in which it occurs, including expectations about competence, the visibility of mistakes, and opportunities to work through uncertainty. This paper explores how these conditions may shape learners’ emotional experiences of making across two contexts: a formal technical drawing classroom in Abuja, Nigeria, and an informal design and technology workshop in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Using interpretive practitioner inquiry, it examines two illustrative episodes from the author’s teaching practice, focusing on learners’ responses to error, difficulty, and revision. Informed by Self Determination Theory and constructionism, the paper develops a conceptual argument about how institutional framing may shape making as performance, exploration, or a combination of both.
References
Ausman, T., & James, C. (2025). Challenging a curriculum of disembodiment: STEM education in two Canadian classrooms. American Journal of STEM Education, 4, 48–65. https://ojed.org/STEM/article/view/7440/3205
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Blikstein, P. (2013). Digital fabrication and "making" in education: The democratization of invention. In J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching (Eds.), FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors (pp. 203–222). Bielefeld: Transcript Publishers. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839423820.203
Caballero Barragán, C. D. (2025). Democratizing STEM: Citizen science as a tool for engagement and social change. American Journal of STEM Education, 11, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.32674/gznjkg56
Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., & Greenberg, D. (2017). The Makerspace movement: Sites of possibilities for equitable opportunities to engage underrepresented youth in STEM. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 119(6), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711900608
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press.
Fields, D. A., Kafai, Y. B., Nakajima, T. M., Goode, J., & Margolis, J. (2018). Putting making into high school computer science classrooms: Promoting equity in teaching and learning with electronic textiles in Exploring Computer Science. Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2018.1436998
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Gravel, B. E., Olivares, M. C., & Tucker-Raymond, E. (2022). Re-making education in STEM classrooms with computational making. In C. Mouza, A. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, & A. Yadav (Eds.), Professional development for in-service teachers: Research and practices in computing education (pp. 143–170). Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-64802-908-020251009
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
Halverson, E. R., Litts, B. K., & Gravel, B. E. (2018). Forms of emergent collaboration in maker-based learning. In J. Kay & R. Luckin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2018) (Vol. 1, pp. 921–924). International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://repository.isls.org/handle/1/518
Han, S.-Y., Yoo, J., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2017). Understanding makerspace continuance: A self-determination perspective. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.02.003
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x
Ioannou, A., & Gravel, B. E. (2024). Trends, tensions, and futures of maker education research: A 2025 vision for STEM+ disciplinary and transdisciplinary spaces for learning through making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10334-w
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2014). Connected code: Why children need to learn programming. MIT press.
Kent, L. (2025). Facilitating curiosity: Secondary STEM education majors’ experiences in a discovery learning center. American Journal of STEM Education, 7, 81–98. https://doi.org/10.32674/d30ah944
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Maiden, J., Stewart, D. O., & Holloway, K. (2025). Enhancing STEM engagement and confidence: The impact of the verizon innovative learning STEM achievers program on middle school students' attitudes and perceptions. American Journal of STEM Education, 4, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.32674/3cvnqa83
Maltese, A. V., 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
Masters, A. S., McNair, L. D., & Riley, D. M. (2018, June). MAKER: Identifying practices of inclusion in maker and hacker spaces with diverse participation [Paper presentation]. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, United States. https://peer.asee.org/30148
Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_5
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Ablex Publishing.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 13–36). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012372545-5/50003-4
Peppler, K., & Bender, S. (2013). Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(3), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500306
Philip, T. M., Schuler-Brown, S., & Way, W. (2013). A framework for learning about big data with mobile technologies for democratic participation: Possibilities, limitations, and unanticipated obstacles. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 18, 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-013-9202-4
Riley, D. (2008). Engineering and social justice. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00117ED1V01Y200805ETS007
Riley, D. M., & McNair, L. D., & Masters, A. S. (2017, June), Board # 128: An Ethnography of maker and hacker spaces achieving diverse participation, Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--27724
Rouse, R., Espinoza Mora, E., & Hu, Y. (2026). University makerspaces as sites for pre-service STEM teacher preparation. American Journal of STEM Education, 19, 171–176. https://doi.org/10.32674/mpwsyz34
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Schutz, P. A., & Pekrun, R. (Eds.). (2007). Emotion in education. Academic Press.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight "big-tent" criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
Turner, J. C., & Patrick, H. (2004). Motivational influences on student participation in classroom learning activities. Teachers College Record, 106(9), 1759–1785. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00404.x
van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Vongkulluksn, V. W., Matewos, A. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Marsh, J. A. (2018). Motivational factors in makerspaces: A mixed methods study of elementary school students' situational interest, self-efficacy, and achievement emotions. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0129-0
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
Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Uchechukwu Ekwueme-Duru
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) [year] [author]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Call for Special Issue Proposals 
