Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 751–763 | Cite as

Stitching Circuits: Learning About Circuitry Through E-textile Materials

Article

Abstract

Central to our understanding of learning is the relationship between various tools and technologies and the structuring of disciplinary subject matter. One of the staples of early science education curriculum is the use of electrical circuit toolkits to engage students in broader discussions of energy. Traditionally, these concepts are introduced to youth using battery packs, insulated wire and light bulbs. However, there are affordances and limitations in the way this toolset highlights certain conceptual aspects while obscuring others, which we argue leads to common misconceptions about electrical circuitry. By contrast, we offer an alternative approach utilizing an e-textiles toolkit for developing understanding of electrical circuitry, testing the efficacy of this approach for learning in elective settings to pave the way for later classroom adoption. This study found that youth who engaged in e-textile design demonstrated significant gains in their ability to diagram a working circuit, as well as significant gains in their understanding of current flow, polarity and connections. The implications for rethinking our current toolkits for teaching conceptual understanding in science are discussed.

Keywords

Circuitry Conceptual understanding E-textiles Toolkits LilyPad Arduino 

References

  1. Asoko H (1996) Developing scientific concepts in the primary classroom: teaching about electric circuits. In: Welford G, Osborne J, Scott P (eds) Research in science education in Europe. Falmer Press, London, pp 36–49Google Scholar
  2. Berzowska J (2005) Electronic textiles: wearable computers, reactive fashion, and soft computation. Text J Cloth Cult 3(1):58–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buechley L (2010) Questioning invisibility. Computer 43(4):84–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buechley L, Hill B (2010) LilyPad in the wild: how hardware’s long tail is supporting new engineering and design communities. In: The proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on designing interactive systemsGoogle Scholar
  5. Buechley L, Eisenberg M, Catchen H, Crockett A (2008) The Lilypad arduino: using computational textiles to investigate engagement, aesthetics, and diversity in computer science education. In: The CHI 2008 proceedings, pp 423–432Google Scholar
  6. Creswell JW (2009) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CAGoogle Scholar
  7. Evans J (1978) Teaching electricity with batteries and bulbs. Phys Teach 16(1):15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fredette N, Lochhead J (1980) Students’ conceptions of simple circuits. Phys Teach 18:194–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kafai Y, Peppler K (in press) Rethinking transparency in critical making with e-textiles. In: Boler M, Ratto M (eds) DIY citizenship. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. National Research Council (2012) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Osborne R (1980) A method for investigation of concept understanding in science. Eur J Sci Educ 2(3):311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Osborne R (1981) Children’s ideas about electric current. N Z Sci Teach 29:12–19Google Scholar
  13. Osborne R (1983) Modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Res Sci Technol Educ 1(1):73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Osborne R, Tasker R, Schollum B (1981) Video: electric current. Working paper no 51, learning in science projects, Hamilton, New Zealand, SERA, University of WaikatoGoogle Scholar
  15. Osborne J, Black P, Smith M, Meadows J (1991) Primary SPACE project research report: electricity. Liverpool University Press, LiverpoolGoogle Scholar
  16. Papert S (1980) Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  17. Peppler K, Glosson D (in press) Learning about circuitry with e-textiles in after-school settings. In: Buechley L, Peppler K, Eisenberg M, Kafai Y (eds) Textile messages: dispatches from the world of E-textiles and education. Peter Lang Publishing, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  18. Shepardson DP, Moje EB (1994) The nature of fourth graders’ understandings of electric circuits. Sci Educ 78(5):489–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shipstone D (1984) A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple D.C. circuits. Eur J Sci Educ 6:59–87Google Scholar
  20. Tasker R, Osborne R (1985) Science teaching and science learning. In: Osborne R, Freyberg P (eds) Learning in science: the implications of children’s science. Heinemann Education, Auckland, pp 15–27Google Scholar
  21. Tiberghien A, Delacote G (1976) Manipulations et representations de circuits electriques simples chez des enfants de 7 a 12 ans. Review Francaise de Pedagogie 34:32–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Turkle S, Papert S (1992) Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. J Math Behav 11(1):3–33Google Scholar
  23. Ullah S, Khan P, Ullah N, Saleem S, Higgins H, Kwak KS (2009) A review of wireless body area networks for medical applications. Int J Commun Network Syst Sci 2(8):797–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Learning SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Learning SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations