1 Introduction

Maker movement - the active process of creating, building, designing and innovating with tools and materials to produce sharable artefacts, has gained enormous popularity and visibility in recent years (Leavy et al., 2023; Timotheou & Ioannou, 2019). Its role in education is not only reflected in improving student knowledge, providing opportunities for authentic engagement through a series of do-it-yourself activities, but also in cultivating life-long learning, experimentation, encouraging learning disposition, increasing inequality in access to learning, emphasizing the values of hands-on experience, and transforming consumers into creators (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014; Maaia, 2018). The maker movement is characterized by the following elements: creation, maker space, makers, and maker culture (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014; Ying, 2018). Creators, gathered by the maker culture within the maker space, create, that is, use open-source software and hardware resources to turn ideas into reality (Ying, 2018). Due to its popularity and spread, the maker movement is recognized as the third industrial revolution (Huang & Wang, 2022). One of the reasons for this is the setting of specific policies to encourage and actively promote the development of maker economies worldwide by various governments (Wang & Zhang, 2020), because the maker movement can empower smaller communities, develop civic engagement within communities, increase the connection of these communities and revive manufacturing.

The maker movement originated from the advancement of high technology and the development of new digital production technologies such as: wearable electronic devices, open source hardware, robotics, 3D printers and so on (Ying, 2018). 3D printers represent the upper limit of digital production and key technologies within the maker movement, because these technologies are capable of designing, creating (3D modelling), and ensuring the fast, mass production of complex physical objects (3D printing), while also providing goods that are affordable to the middle class of consumers (Sinha et al., 2020). 3DMP work is based on production, which refers to the stacking layers to produce a particular 3D shape (Huang & Wang, 2022). The process of obtaining a 3D model consists of a 3D modelling process in which a digital version of the 3D model is created using software, and a 3D printing process in which, thanks to the 3D printer, the digital model is transformed into a physical object. 3DMP is based on additive digital model files and is not spatially limited, unlike conventional manufacturing approaches (Huang & Wang, 2022). By quickly and directly producing tangible 3D objects, 3DMPs can transform ideas into reality and contribute to the expansion of our imagination and our thinking in general (Skylar-Scott et al., 2019). Besides becoming popular in the general education context as an emerging technology, they have also become available in many schools, because of their many benefits in teaching (Cheng et al., 2020; Thornburg et al., 2014a, b). Some of them include the fact that 3DMP improve student knowledge, engagement, creativity, and positive attitudes towards learning different subjects (Berry et al., 2010; Cheng et al., 2020), while they also improve student skills in technical drawing, product design, and development (Steed & Weevers, 2016). In addition to the above, research shows that the integration of 3DMP also provides benefits in the teaching process, and to the teachers who use them, i.e. they increase their interest and engagement, creating positive attitudes about their application in teaching and their abilities to adapt the content they teach to their students’ capabilities and create original learning materials, which are not easily accessible and available (Arslan & Erdogan, 2021; Horowitz & Schultz, 2014; Ford & Minshall, 2019; Karaduman, 2018). This is especially noticeable at the secondary schools (Anđić et al., 2023a). However, in many studies it was observed that teachers are still not able to use all the benefits of applying 3DMP in teaching, primarily due to the lack of adequate instructions, guidelines on their use and maintenance, as well as lack of understanding of the process for their successful implementation (Arslan & Erdogan, 2021; Karaduman, 2018; Maloy et al., 2017). For these reasons, training courses on the use of 3DMPs have become extremely widespread and are considered crucial to improving education, as well as ensuring wider access to the educational benefits they provide (Cheng et al., 2020; Huang & Wang, 2022). However, these courses are quite new, and teachers still face challenges in their application, which results in a weak representation of these technologies in regular classes. These challenges thus represent a complex process influenced by many factors, which are primarily individual, contextual and technical (Huang & Wang, 2022). Although the importance of many of these factors can be reduced over time through the development of awareness around the digital-technological revolution, importance of 3DMPs, improved access to technology, and increased teacher training on their application, it remains true that teacher conceptions and views, taken as a complex belief system, are still a key factor that prevents their effective integration into real school environment.

Given that research on this topic is not currently widespread, numerous researchers (Anđić et al., 2023c; Arslan & Erdogan, 2021; Karaduman, 2018; Maloy et al., 2017; Simpson et al., 2017) have proposed intensifying it, as this would allow us to get a clear picture of the application of 3DMP in practice and how to take adequate steps to promote them, while also raising awareness and training teachers on the ways and importance of their application, in order to remove those barriers that prevent their increased use. Unlike numerous tools that try to measure teachers’ conceptual beliefs through predetermined items, which prevents them from expressing their free opinions, metaphors allow them that breadth and thus represent a tool that more faithfully depicts the truth (Bas, 2017). Since a metaphor represents a deep reflection of an individual’s conceptions and views of a certain object at a moment (Saban, 2010), we decided to use this tool in our study to explore teachers’ conceptual beliefs about 3DMPs through the analysis of metaphors.

1.1 Concepts which teachers hold about the application of 3D modelling and printing in teaching

The level of the adoption of 3DMP in pre-university teaching is still low, both because of the lack of adequate technological education and the prevailing conceptions of secondary school teachers about this technology (Anđić et al., 2023c; Holzmann et al., 2020). In the following paragraphs, we will look at research on analysing teachers’ concepts, their applications and the challenges they face within the framework of 3DMP.

Using a qualitative research design, Cheng et al. (2020) examined teachers’ concepts about the application of 3D modelling and printing in teaching. The results of that study indicated that teachers believed that using 3DMP encourages student-centred teaching and the more active participation of students in the teaching process. The results provided by Love et al. (2022) indicate that science teachers in secondary schools hold the concepts that they are not sufficiently well-trained for the application of 3DMP in teaching. These authors also state that well-developed and implemented training for teachers can contribute to developing more positive concepts among secondary school teachers about the application of 3D modelling and printing in teaching. Yüksel et al. (2019) and Akyol et al. (2022) argued that secondary school teachers concepts that the application of 3DMP contributes to spatial and creative thinking among secondary school students. Based on a qualitative study through the phenomenography approach Anđić et al. (2023a) indicated that teachers perceive 3DMP as tools for classroom modernization, learning, and improvements in teaching, the professional orientation of students, and teacher professional development.

Holzmann et al. (2020) concluded that performance expectancy, facilitating conditions and anxiety are the main factors that influence the decision of secondary school teachers to apply 3DMP in teaching. Arslan and Erdogan (2021) pointed out that application of 3D printers is important for developing design skills, easily developing materials, using software and technology, multidimensional and creative thinking, promoting knowledge, and retaining what has been learned, as well as student engagement, interest, enjoyment and curiosity. Research by Anđić et al. (2023a) shows that STEM teachers considered that 3DMP can be used successfully in the classroom to improve student outcomes and teachers’ digital literacy skills. Assante et al. (2020) points out that the use of 3D printers in the classroom contributes to the visualisation of teaching content and helps students to understand abstract teaching content better. Anđić et al. (2023b) and Buehler et al., 2016 found that 3D printing can be used to create educational aids for accessible curriculum content and custom adaptive devices for students with special support needs.

A smaller number of teachers consider that 3DMPs are impractical, that they do not make any contribution, and that they are neither easy nor simple to apply Arslan and Erdogan (2021). The most prominent challenges teachers face when working on 3DMP are the inability to create everything they want, the inability to think in three dimensions, insufficient knowledge about the software, and the fact that producing 3DMP material is time-consuming. The challenges that teachers face when creating concrete 3D objects are difficulties in adjusting the size of the object, joining parts, extrusion, intersection, subtraction, and rotation. A significant number of teachers declared that, based on their initial experience, they would never apply 3DPM again. All these above-mentioned researches point to the need for further examination of this area to fully understand teacher concepts and give recommendations for improving the application of this technology in teaching. The aforementioned studies used different methodologies (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods) to examine teacher concepts. However, based on a review of the prestigious databases of scientific papers (Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, IEEE Xplore, and so on) no research was found that has examined secondary school teachers’ conceptions about 3DMP using the approach of conceptual metaphors.

1.2 The concept of the metaphor

If a picture is worth 1000 words, a metaphor is worth 1000 pictures. Because a picture only offers a static reflection of the essence, while a metaphor provides a conceptual framework for thinking about something (Saban et al., 2007; Shuell, 1990). Metaphors have regularly been used in education (Low, 2008). They represent one of the most essential approaches to thinking (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, Lakoff & Turner, 1989). They identify something as the same or similar to an unrelated idea by emphasizing their similarities (Akçay, 2016). The metaphor is most often determined in this way - through comparing two ideas, noticing the similarities between them and using one situation as an image of another situation, between which there is a connection. For example, the metaphor Children are flowers refers both to the idea of children and the idea of flowers and the connection between them - children are like flowers because they grow quickly and are lovely (Catalano et al., 2021). Metaphors play a central role in defining our everyday reality, where they are connected with and reflected in the same patterns of human thoughts and actions, meaning they also serve as an essential component of communication (Levin & Wagner, 2006). A metaphor is also defined as a reflection of a certain person’s deep concepts regarding the idea being considered at that moment (Saban, 2010). A metaphor is not just an analogical device; we try to understand something by comparing it to something else. Once expressed, it also projects a form of argument or a genuine preference for one object (or set of objects) over another (Saban et al., 2007). Metaphors act as a powerful mental model through which people understand the world around them, connecting complex phenomena to something previously experienced and particular. It represents the process of building a connection between two different ideas (the concrete and the abstract) or the projection of one schema (the source domain of the metaphor) onto another schema (the target domain of the metaphor), which makes it an exceptional cognitive tool. A metaphor is generally used when we want to explore or understand an abstract, esoteric, or highly speculative idea (a scheme). The more abstract, vague, or speculative it is, the greater the number of metaphors that can be determined for it. Such ideas are to be explained, and with the metaphor, through a complex configuration of information and the richness of a certain experience, we can achieve this more effectively than through literal language. Hence, because of their enormous power to reveal and show the unconscious state of thought-making, metaphors are extremely valuable in education (Catalano et al., 2021). Metaphors in education can also be defined as a lens, screen, or filter through which a particular subject is viewed and, at the same time, this can become a mental model for thinking about something in the light of that something else (Saban et al., 2007; Thomas & Beauchamp, 2011). Unlike numerous tools that try to measure teachers’ conceptions and concepts through predetermined items, which prevents them from expressing their free opinion, metaphors allow individuals that space and width and thus represent a tool that more faithfully depicts the truth (Bas, 2017). Since a metaphor represents a deep reflection of an teacher’s conceptual understanding of a certain object (Saban, 2010), we decided to use them  as a research tool in our  study to explore teachers’ conceptual beliefs about new technology − 3DMPs.

1.3 Conceptual metaphors and teachers’ conceptual beliefs about new educational technology

1.3.1 Conceptual metaphors

In order to be able to talk about abstract, esoteric, and highly speculative ideas (concepts), borrowing/utilizing the structure of a less complicated concept can be beneficial, this is known in the literature as a conceptual metaphor (Jensen et al., 2021). For example, within the famous conceptual metaphor behind Sfard’s argument “Learning is acquisition”, the complex concept of learning is often understood in terms of the less complicated concept of acquisition (Jensen et al., 2021; Sfard, 1998). This metaphor structures our understanding of learning in a way that makes the concepts we associate with it, like gaining, acquiring, or sharing knowledge, meaningful. It is important to emphasize that although conceptual metaphors allow us to understand highly abstract concepts through less abstract ones, they also limit how we understand them (Jensen et al., 2021). These limitations appear in the form of metaphorical entailments that profoundly affect how we speak and think about the concept and its relationship to other phenomena. They frame and limit our thinking and leave us blinded to different possible understandings of that concept.

The revealed/hidden meanings of metaphors and what they reveal about the understanding of the people who use them have made the analysis of conceptual metaphors a popular form of qualitative research (Low et al., 2010). For these reasons, metaphor is a method that is often used in educational research, teaching, and learning (Shanshan et al., 2022). Metaphors are an effective tool for understanding abstract concepts (Deng et al., 2021), building social identity (Goretzki et al., 2021), and understanding complex issues (Burnette et al., 2022). Metaphors can highlight taken-for-granted assumptions and, from that perspective, help us discover how this affects our practice (Shanshan et al., 2022). From this perspective, metaphors is an exceptional tool for discovering and analysing teachers’ conceptual beliefs because they are reflected in their practice and have the most significant influence on its further outcomes. Teachers’ conceptual beliefs refer to their deeply held concepts, assumptions, attitudes, values, and convictions about teaching and learning (Kagan, 1992).

1.3.2 Teachers’ conceptual beliefs about new technologies analysed through conceptual metaphors

There is a large body of evidence that metaphors have been used to analyse teachers’ conceptual beliefs of their experiences in practice (Karabay, 2016; Ma & Gao, 2017; Ozturk & Aglarci, 2017; Kaya, 2017; Şahin & Sabanci, 2018), but also that there has been only a very limited number of studies of using metaphors to analyse teachers’ concepts about using new technologies (Aydın et al., 2021; Bas, 2017; Çuhadar, 2022; Falin et al., 2021; Fidan et al., 2021; Gezgin et al., 2019; Koc, 2013). We will discuss this research in this part of the paper.

Integrating new technologies (like smartphones, video-based platforms, augmented reality, virtual reality, 3DMP, artificial intelligence, and robotics) into education today is an essential activity and largely depends on the teacher’s conceptual beliefs (Anđić et al. 2023a). Up to now, there have only been a few studies in the body of knowledge that deal with the examination of teachers’ conceptual beliefs about new technologies. analysed through metaphors, such as smartphones, video-based platforms, digital platforms for flipped classrooms (e-books), augmented reality, robotics and 3D printers (Aydın et al., 2021; Bas, 2017; Çuhadar, 2022; Falin et al., 2021; Fidan et al., 2021; Gezgin et al., 2019; Koc, 2013). In research by Koc (2013), pre service teachers’ conceptual beliefs about technology were analysed through metaphors. The results showed that future teachers saw technology through 59 different metaphors, which were classified into five conceptual categories i.e. they characterized technology as development, facilitation, a vital necessity, power, and a threat. It was concluded that these views of technology were limited and focused primarily on technological dimensions and artefacts. In the study by Bas (2017), teachers’ conceptual beliefs about information and communication technologies (ICT) were also analysed through metaphors. The results showed that secondary school teachers saw ICT through 46 metaphors, which were grouped into the following conceptual categories: a knowledge source, a guide, reform, a plant, and a problem. These categories led to the conclusion that teachers generally see technology as a positive tool in teaching, which serves as a source of knowledge, a guide and represents a sustainable reform. However, one category of negative perception of technology was highlighted – one which sees it as a problem, which might be a consequence of the negative level of teacher self-efficacy, computer self-efficacy perceptions, attitudes towards computer or low levels of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Çuhadar (2022) analyzed teachers’ conceptual beliefs about the application of technology through the analysis of metaphors in special education. The results of his study showed that teachers saw technology through 54 metaphors classified into six conceptual categories, of which the metaphors water, key and compass were cited most often. Teachers saw technology as water in the spirit of a basic human need, and as a key component and compass within the teaching process. All the metaphors that the teachers mentioned were positive. In a similar way, in the research by Aydın et al. (2021) teachers also perceive technology most often through metaphors of water and air, in terms of basic human needs. In the research of Karakoç-Öztürk (2021), teachers’ conceptual beliefs about e-books were analysed through metaphors. The results showed that teachers most often perceive e-books through the following metaphors: facilitating, information source, accessible, portable, requirement, inadequate, attractive, and harmful. Mostly metaphors have a positive character, except for the inadequate and harmful category, where teachers see them as an inadequate and harmful tool for use in teaching. Fidan et al. (2021), examined teachers’ conceptual beliefs about the application of LEGO robotics (like games, toys, jigsaw puzzles, and robots), augmented reality (like a 3D virtual world, hallucination, magic, or holograms) and flipped classroom (like distance learning, learning by video, face-to-face and virtual learning) through the analysis of metaphors. In their research, it was confirmed that teachers have positive conceptual beliefs about these technologies and through metaphors analysis it was revealed that they attributed primarily educational meaning to them. Similarly, Gezgin et al. (2019) examined teachers’ conceptual beliefs about the use of smartphones through the analysis of metaphors. The authors confirmed that metaphors related to smartphones (being like a friend, an organ, like eating, or something that is needed, for example) had vital meanings, while metaphors for nomophobia (like nothingness) had meanings related to survival, and metaphors for fear of missing out (like failing to be up to date) had meanings related to failing behind and need. Falin et al. (2021) examined the metaphorical comparison of the making of music and the process of clay 3D printing. The results of this study showed that through musical improvisation during 3D printing, the practitioner could adapt to changing situations and thus overcome the unfamiliarity of the manufacturing process. This improvisation also offered an exploratory approach to printing rather than mere repetition. In addition to the above, it was observed that involvement in the digital process offered power over the pre-programmed script that the 3D printer executes.

Based on a detailed review of the literature in the leading scientific databases no previous research on the examination of teachers’ conceptual beliefs about the application of 3DMP through metaphor analysis has been found. For these reasons, and for the needs of future education and more successful practice in this domain, this research was carried out to fill the gap in the research on teachers’ conceptual beliefs about the application of 3DMP through the analysis of metaphors. This research aims to answer the following research questions: (i) What conceptual metaphorical depiction do teachers use to conceptualize 3D modelling?; (ii) What conceptual metaphorical depiction do teachers use to conceptualize 3D printing?; (iii) How does the experience of using 3D modelling and printing technology affect teachers’ conceptual metaphorical depictions of this technology?

2 Methodology

This research employed a one-year longitudinal study design. Data for the research was collected in three waves, immediately after training, and then after three months, and one year of teaching experience using 3DMP in teaching. In order to obtain the most valid and reliable findings, this research employed a mixed-method research approach. It followed the recommendations of Ruspini (2002), Cohen et al. (2017), and Krathwohl (1998) for longitudinal studies using the same sample to measure changes in individual conceptual beliefs over time. These researchers indicate that the application of multi-wave longitudinal research in education with the application of mixed methods of research provides a comprehensive understanding of the complex phenomenon of teachers’ conceptual beliefs, and enables insight into the evolution of their conceptual beliefs, as well as the identification of trends and reasons for change. Cohen et al. (2017), Krathwohl (1998), and Flick et al. (2004) all emphasize that longitudinal data based on mixed methods of research can be of great importance for policymakers in creating and improving teacher professional development programs, curriculum design and strategies for improving teaching efficiency.

We aimed to design and implement this research with meticulous care, following the research design outlined in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The research design of the study

Full size image

The design, implementation and detailed description of a carefully designed research methodology is of great importance in longitudinal studies as it ensures the maintenance of consistency over time, reduces bias, increases reproducibility and allows for a clear presentation of results, thus increasing the accuracy, trustworthiness, and reliability of the research (Patton, 2002a, b; Menard, 2007). To present the methodology of this research in a clear and organized manner, this section will be divided into three parts. First, the participant data will be presented, followed by information on the research settings and data collection. Finally, the approaches for data processing will be presented, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

2.1 Participants

Secondary school teachers were selected as participants in this study, as many studies have indicated that secondary schools are very well suited to the introduction of 3DMP into the classroom, taking advantage of all the benefits of this technology (Anđić et al., 2022; Holzmann et al., 2020). This research was conducted on 74 secondary school teachers from Montenegro. Of the total number of study participants (N = 74), 43 were female and 31 were male. Most of the participants were between 40 and 50 years old (N = 21). The teachers who participated in the study taught a total of 12 subjects and their students were between 14 and 18 years old. The selection of a larger number of participants with different backgrounds, such as teaching subject and years of experience in longitudinal studies compared to case studies and the observation of a smaller group of participants make it possible to obtain diverse data and to place the obtained research results in broader social contexts (Menard, 2007; Ruspini, 2002). In this study, participants were selected through the purposive sampling approach. Purposive sampling is suitable for the in-depth research of phenomena with participants selected on the basis of meeting certain criteria (Cohen et al., 2017). In our study, the teachers who were included in the research had to meet the following criteria:

  1. i)

    They had completed the training for the application of 3D modelling and printing in teaching, which was an integral part of this research (see Section 2.2);

  2. ii)

    After the training, they actively incorporate 3D modelling and printing into their teaching practice at least once a month.

Training on using 3DMP did not then require teacher participation in the study. All the teachers participated in the research voluntarily. Anonymity and discretion were guaranteed to the participants at every stage of the study. The data on the participants is displayed in Table 1.

Table 1 Demographic information about the participants
Full size table

2.2 Research settings and data collection

The teachers who participated in our study voluntarily enrolled in a 6–8 h workshop focusing on implementing 3D modelling and printing in secondary schools. The workshop was structured through several components, including (a) a theoretical introduction to 3D modelling and printing, (b) a discussion on implementing 3D modelling and printing in the educational setting and (c) hands-on practical sessions in both 3D modelling and printing. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) was used as the basis for developing a workshop on integrating 3DMP in teaching. In the introductory part of the training, the teachers were introduced to various pedagogical approaches and subject-related examples for the use of 3DMP in teaching, followed by an explanation of the technical details of 3DMP. This was followed by an active discussion on the use of 3DMP in the classroom, during which the trainers cleared up any ambiguities that had arisen. In the hands-on practical sessions, the teachers were asked to model and print a simple 3D model. A detailed description of all the training phases and the way they were designed is described in our previous studies (Anđić et al. 2023a; Ulbrich et al., 2020). Upon completion of the workshop, each of the participating teachers’ schools was equipped with a 3D printer and material for printing, with funds for the procurement of this equipment previously allocated by the project that funded training and research. In this way, the teachers who participated in the training were provided with access to the technology for their further use in teaching. The workshop trainers also made themselves available to the teachers, providing their contact information, such as email and professional phone number, for potential future support or assistance in overcoming obstacles. This should ensure that teachers are supported in the initial stages of using new technologies in the classroom, which can help to facilitate the correct use and application of new technologies or innovations in the classroom, as research by Maxwell (2014) and Afshari et al. (2009) has shown. After the training, the teachers received a 20-minute explanation of conceptual metaphors and their overview, as well as examples, and their questions were answered. The examples of metaphors given to the teachers were related to other teaching activities, such as reading or writing, to avoid influencing the generation of teachers’ metaphors about 3DMP. The participants were then engaged in small group discussions on metaphors in 3DMP, followed by 15 presentations of in which the conclusions of the discussion were presented. This activity aimed to deepen understanding of metaphors, dispel potential misunderstandings, and encourage teachers to express their opinions freely for research purposes. When designing this activity, the recommendations of Ulusoy (2013) and Ulusoy (2022) were followed.

After the introductory activity, data were collected in three waves, following the approach taken in previous research by Koc (2013), Saban (2010), Saban et al. (2007), Schmitt (2005), Seung et al. (2011). Based on the above-mentioned studies, two questions were formulated based on the metaphor generation approach: a) “3D modelling is like… because…”; and b) “3D printing is like… because…”. In addition, as recommended in these studies, the teachers’ responses were collected in handwritten form. They wrote their answers in their native language, with no limit placed on the number of words. The aim of using handwritten responses with no word limit was to encourage teachers to express their attitudes and opinions freely, consciously, authentically and flexibly to the extent they wished, allowing deeper insights into teachers’ opinions about 3DMP.

The first data collection wave took place immediately after the training completion, the second wave was conducted three months later, and the third one year after the teachers had started incorporating 3DMP into their teaching practice. The period of one year for data collection was determined by the duration of the project and the availability of research participants to the researchers. Within this time period, the time points for data collection were selected based on previous research on teachers’ concepts of technology. Sung et al. (2016) point out that the first contact with technology during education is significant because people learn about technology and determine its value, while teachers mostly base this value of technology on the attitude that technology can help them achieve instructional goals (Anderson & Maninger, 2007). For this reason, the first wave of data collection in our study was in the period immediately following training in the use of 3DMP. Demetriadis et al. (2003) and Sprenger and Schwaninger (2021) point out that the first three months in the use of educational technology are crucial to overcoming the obstacles that teachers and students face in incorporating new technologies into the classroom. To explore this aspect in the second wave of data collection, 3DMP was used in the classroom after three months. As research by Clausen (2007) and Flowers et al. (2000) shows, a year’s experience of using technology indicates the most realistic teacher opinions and attitudes towards technology, its advantages and disadvantages, and its uses in the classroom. Therefore, in our research the third wave of data collection was conducted after a year of using 3EDMP in the teaching by teachers.

When collecting data in all three waves, the same principle was applied. The teachers used a code or pseudonym on the questionnaire. The first wave data was scanned and saved. The second wave conducted three months after training at a conference for teachers on 3DMP, involved presenting their experiences with the technology in teaching. The teachers were given their previous survey sheets and asked to analyse and update their answers if their concepts or opinions had changed. The data was then scanned and stored. The third wave took place at a final project conference one year after the training, and the teachers were given their previous answers and the metaphors produced in both previous waves to analyse and update.

2.3 Qualitative and quantitative data processing

The data collected in the present study was analysed using qualitative and quantitative approaches. A comprehensive review of the data collected from all three waves was conducted before its inclusion in the detailed analysis. Questionnaires that lacked responses in the three waves were excluded from the study. The qualitative data was analysed using the inductive approach proposed by Miles and Huberman (1994), which comprised of three phases: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing (verification). The data reduction phase involved a meticulous examination of the teachers’ answers, leading to the exclusion of one questionnaire, due to its deviation from the production of metaphors. In the excluded answer, a definition of 3D modelling and printing was written instead of the production of metaphors. Subsequently, 74 teacher responses that contained complete data in all three waves were included for further analysis. This data was then coded based on the conceptual metaphorical images that the teachers provided for 3D modelling and printing.

The conceptual categories were developed by a comparative analysis of the produced metaphors and their explanations. The methodology outlined by Saban (2020, 2010) was followed, including calculating the frequency of the metaphors, classifying similar metaphors into the same conceptual category, and ensuring that each metaphor was displayed in only one conceptual category. To ensure the accuracy of the obtained data in the process of allocating the metaphors into conceptual categories, the research team, three external experts in qualitative research, and four teachers who were participants in the study participated in a joint member-checking session (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Creswell, 2014). During the joint session, each expert involved in the allocation process explained their opinions and engaged in discussions with other members. This collaborative allocation approach enhances the reliability and meaningfulness of the conceptual categories (Carey & Gelaude, 2008; Patton, 2002a, b). The reliability of the obtained data was calculated using the formula of Miles and Huberman (1994), which indicated a 94% correspondence in allocating the conceptual metaphors into a conceptual category among the member’s research team. Similarly, a correspondence of 89% was found between the participants in the research team on the one hand and the teachers and experts in qualitative research on the other. These findings support the reliability of the obtained qualitative data.

In order to analyse the obtained data from the qualitative standpoint, in our research, the conceptual metaphors about 3D modelling (3DM) and 3D printing (3DP) were converted into a nominal numeric value, a dummy variable (1 = a conceptual metaphor is produced by teachers; 0 = a conceptual metaphor is not produced by teachers) and added to the database. Even though teachers had the option of listing multiple metaphors, in our study the teachers mostly used one metaphor to describe 3DM and one to describe 3DP in each wave of the data collecting. This data was analysed using Cochran’s Q test to examine whether there was a difference between the metaphors collected from teachers about 3DM and 3DP g in the three waves of data collecting. The Cochran’s Q test is a statistical method used to evaluate whether there are variations in a dichotomous dependent variable across three or more related groups (Krippendorff, 2004). It can be thought of as similar to the one-way repeated measures ANOVA, specifically for dichotomous dependent variables, or as an enhanced version of McNemar’s test. Cochran’s Q test assumes that there should be an equal number of observations in each dependent sample, no normal distribution, and that the data is represented only by 0 and 1. This approach to statistical data processing is recommended for research that follows changes in metaphors by Krippendorff (2004).

3 Results

The teachers involved in this study generated 25 conceptual metaphorical expressions related to 3DM and 31 for 3DP. During the process of comparison and categorization, the metaphors were classified into nine distinct categories. The results are presented in three sections: the first part showcases the teachers’ metaphorical expressions related to 3DM, the second part highlights those related to 3DP, and the third part indicating the differences between generated metaphors in the three waves.

3.1 Conceptual category of metaphors about 3D modelling

The metaphors used by the teachers to describe the application of 3DM in teaching were classified into four conceptual categories: Digital Development, Originality vs. Replication, Skills Requirement, and Knowledge Contributor vs. Obstructionist (see Table 2).

Table 2 Conceptual categorization of the metaphors about 3D modelling
Full size table

3.1.1 Digital development

This conceptual category included the largest number of metaphors that the teachers generated about 3DM in all three waves. It consists of those metaphors that the teachers expressed, indicating that a high level of continuous improvement is necessary for 3DM. As can be seen from Table 2, the metaphor “programmer” had the highest frequency in the first wave, and its frequency then increased in the second and third waves. Examples of these metaphors across all three waves from three different participants are given below:

3D modelling is like a programmer because you have to constantly improve and follow trends to keep up with the times (1st wave; 37-year-old, Mathematics teacher);

3D modelling is like a programmer because it creates a series of rules, codes and instructions that another machine must execute (2nd wave; 46 years old Chemistry teacher);

3D modelling is like a programmer’s because he can use different programming languages from simple to very complex. Insofar as the programme is simplified, the product is bad, insofar as is complicated, the product is getting better (3rd wave, 52 years old, Computer Science teacher).

3.1.2 Originality vs. Replication

A total of 17 teachers generated metaphors that were classified into the conceptual category of Originality vs. Replication. The teachers who participated in this research saw 3DM as an opportunity for originality or replication. In the first wave, the unicorn metaphor had the highest frequency and was used by teachers to indicate the possibilities of developing unique models through the application of 3DM, for example:

3D modelling is like a unicorn because it enables the creation of desired models that can be unique and of special value to their creator (1st wave, 49 years old, Physics teacher).

However, in the second wave, this metaphor disappeared, and the dominant place in terms of frequency was occupied by the metaphor ‘Personal Touch’, the frequency of which increases further in the third wave. Examples of these metaphors in the second and third wave are given below:

3D modelling is like a personal touch because it depends on everyone how much effort they put into their touch and what they will achieve with it (2nd wave, 34-year-old, Biology teacher);

3D modelling is like a personal touch because it can be wonderful and pleasant and also be a bad and very unpleasant experience (3rd wave, 52-year-old, English teacher).

3.1.3 Skills requirement

Sixteen teachers produced six metaphors that indicated the necessary digital skills teachers should utilize 3DM in teaching. In the first and second waves, the highest frequency in this conceptual category was the spaceship metaphor, which indicated the complexity of 3DM. Examples of these metaphors include:

3D modelling is like a spaceship because it offers great opportunities to those who know how to handle it (1st wave, 41-year-old, Mathematics teacher);

3D modelling is like a spaceship because it requires a good expert to navigate successfully, otherwise, the process will not be successful (2nd wave, 41-year-old, Mother Tongue teacher);

In the third wave, the frequency of the spaceship metaphor decreased and equalized with the Rubik’s Cube metaphor. An example of this teacher-produced metaphor is given below:

3D modelling is like a Rubik’s Cube because it takes a lot of patience and turning to make all the pieces fit together (3rd wave, 47-year-old, Mathematics teacher).

3.1.4 Knowledge contributor vs. Obstructionist

Twelve teachers created metaphorical expressions to convey their views on the impact of 3DM on student learning. They were categorized into the conceptual category: Knowledge Contributor vs. Obstructionist. The most commonly used metaphor was “lens”, as seen in these examples from all three waves:

3D modelling is like a lens: it magnifies details and reveals new perspectives (1st wave: 27-year-old, Geography teacher).

3D modelling is like lens because it allows for a closer examination of details, much like a magnifying glass (2nd wave, 55-year-old, Biology teacher).

3D modelling is like a lens because it opens up new horizons (3rd wave, 44-year-old, Music teacher).

3.2 The conceptual categories of metaphors about 3D printing

The conceptual metaphors about 3DP produced by the teachers were grouped into five categories: Creation-Production, Facilitation of Needs, Educational Tool, Innovation & Creativity, and Sensitive Being. In Table 3 these metaphors, their frequencies, and their conceptual categories are presented.

Table 3 Conceptual categorization of the metaphors produced about 3D printing
Full size table

3.2.1 Creation– Production

Within the conceptual category of creation-producing, the teacher metaphors were classified as being oriented towards the very process of printing models by 3D printers. Teachers often use “masonry” as a metaphor to describe the process of 3DP. They see the process of 3DP as similar to laying bricks, layer by layer, until the final product is complete. Examples of metaphors from all three waves are given below:

3D printing is like masonry because it creates a model by stacking it layer by layer (1st wave, 35-year-old, Mathematics teacher);

3D modelling is like masonry because they have to carefully stack the material so that the product itself is good (2nd wave, 28-year-old, History teacher);

3D printing is like masonry because in the work they create different walls, the combination of which creates a model (3rd wave, 50-year-old, Art teacher).

3.2.2 The facilitation of different needs

Nineteen teachers generated conceptual metaphors classified in the facilitating different needs category. The main concept of the metaphors generated by the teachers was related to the ability of each user of 3DP to adapt it to their own needs and wishes. The metaphors with the highest frequency in this category were: magical sculpture and a private personal factory. Examples of metaphors given are below:

3D printing is like a magician sculptor because based on our drawings, it can create models that we designed and drew (1st wave, 42-year-old, Computer Science teacher);

3D printing is like a magician sculptor because the magician sculptor realizes the designed models according to his inspiration and need (2nd wave, 37-years old, Mother Tongue teacher);

3D printing is like your own private factory because you can produce the models you need in the quantity you need very cheaply (3rd wave, 49-year-old, Chemistry teacher).

3.2.3 An educational tool

The conceptual metaphors created by 15 teachers and related directly to the application of 3DP in teaching are classified within this conceptual category. The metaphor of navigation and being an explorer were the most common in this category in all three waves, for example:

3D printing is like being a navigator because it can help us get to the right place and the desired goal (1st wave, 48-year-old, Chemistry teacher).

3D printing is like navigation because, based on the imputations we gave them, they can help us get to the desired place more easily (2nd wave, 53-year-old, Computer Science teacher).

3D printing is like being an explorer because it enables us to discover things with its help that we wouldn’t otherwise (3rd wave, 39-year-old, Biology teacher).

3.2.4 Innovation & creativity

The study found that seven teachers used conceptual metaphors to view 3DP as a tool for innovation and creativity. The most frequent metaphor in this category was that of the Artist, appearing in all three waves of data collection.

3D printing is like an artist because he can create his original works but reproduce existing ones (1st wave, 51-year-old, English teacher);

3D printing is like an artist because they can produce models that, in addition to being functional, also have aesthetic value (2nd waves, 38-year-old, Computer Science teacher);

3D printing is like an artist because when everything is set up correctly, it can create beautiful works, but when it’s not, nothing works as it should (3rd wave, 28-year-old Physics teacher).

3.2.5 A sensitive being

Seven teachers in the study used four conceptual metaphors that conveyed their concerns regarding the sensitivity and distractibility of the 3D printing process. The “Spider” metaphor was the most commonly used in the second and third waves, while it was not mentioned in the first wave. Examples of these metaphors are given below:

3D printing is like a spider that weaves a web because it produces thin but strong threads that create networks and a model (2nd wave, 34-year-old, Geography teacher);

3D printing is like a spider because it creates a strong construction, however, even if it is strong, it can sometimes be damaged by simple movements such as the wind (3rd wave, 47-year-old, Chemistry teacher).

3.3 Changes in the metaphors

The second objective of the research was to examine changes in teachers’ conceptual metaphors about 3D modelling and 3D printing over time: immediately following the training, after three months of in service use, and after one year of use in teaching. The results were analysed in two parts: changes in metaphors related to 3D modelling and changes in metaphors related to 3D printing.

3.3.1 Changes in metaphors about 3D modelling

The frequency distributions of the metaphors provided by the teachers about 3D modelling for the first wave, second wave, and third wave are given in Table 4.

Table 4 Distribution of metaphors written by teachers about 3D modelling
Full size table

The results of the Cochran’s Q test analysis, which was conducted to examine whether there was a difference between the metaphors written by the teachers about 3D modelling, are given in Table 5.

Table 5 Cochran’s Q test analysis
Full size table

According to the results of the Cochran’s Q test analysis, the metaphors provided by teachers about 3D modelling differ between waves in the conceptual categories of Digital Development and Originality vs. Replication. This difference was between the first and second waves and the second and third waves for the conceptual category of Digital Development. For the conceptual category Originality vs. Replication, the difference is between the first and second waves. The changes were observed between the first and third wave into the conceptual category of Knowledge Contributor vs. Obstructionist. The changes in teachers’ conceptual metaphors about 3D modelling, between the waves, are presented in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Pairwise comparisons of 3D modelling metaphors. *Yellow lines indicate the difference between waves

Full size image

3.3.2 Changes in metaphors about 3D printing

The frequency distributions of the metaphors provided by the teachers about 3D printing for the first, second, and third waves are given in Table 6.

Table 6 Distribution of metaphors written by teachers about 3D printing
Full size table

The results of the Cochran’s Q test analysis, which was conducted to examine whether there was a difference between the metaphors provided by the teachers about 3D printing, are given in Table 7.

Table 7 Cochran’s Q test analysis
Full size table

According to the results of the Cochran’s Q test analysis, metaphors written by teachers about 3D printing differ between waves in the conceptual category of Creation–Producing and A Sensitive Being. This difference is between the first and third waves for the conceptual category Creation–Production. For the conceptual category of A Sensitive Being, the difference is between the first and second waves. The changes in teachers’ conceptual metaphors about 3D printing, between the waves, are presented in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Pairwise comparisons of 3D printing waves

Full size image

4 Discussion

Using conceptual metaphors as a research approach provides an understanding of highly abstract concepts through less abstract ones, providing data that can be used to improve practice (Jensen et al., 2021; Sfard, 1998). In our study, this approach was used to observe the change in secondary school teachers’ conceptual metaphors about 3DMP at three-time points: after training, after three months of classroom use, and after one year of experience. Through the use of conceptual metaphors, this paper provides information on how teachers’ conceptualisation of 3DMP changes over time, depending on the teacher’s experience of using this technology in the classroom. The study results show that teachers generated a range of metaphorical expressions to describe the application of 3DMP in teaching. The metaphors were classified into nine distinct categories. We will discuss each of them in the next two subsections.

4.1 Teachers’ concepts and their changes to 3D modelling

The results show that teachers’ metaphors about 3D modelling fell into the following four categories: (1) digital development, (2) originality versus replication, (3) skills requirement, and (4) knowledge contributor versus obstructionist.

One of the main conceptual categories that emerged from the results was “digital development”. Teachers saw 3D modelling as a process undertaken by programmers or scientists that requires the use of different software and continuous improvement. They used the metaphor of a programmer, scientist, or similar figure to describe the need to stay up-to-date with the latest trends and technologies in order to successfully use 3D modelling in teaching. These metaphors indicate that teachers consider the process of 3D modelling extremely demanding from a professional development standpoint. In teaching practice, this would mean that for the successful application of 3D modelling in teaching, teachers need longer training and support. Teachers emphasized that just as an experienced programmer regularly reviews and updates his work-code base to adapt to changing requirements and correct errors, 3D modelling constantly changes and improves to keep up with the latest trends and technologies. Using metaphors, teachers pointed out not only the complexity but also the fast-changing process of software for 3D modelling. However, the results of our study indicate that the metaphors that teachers produce in the category of Digital Development differ between the first and second waves and the second and third waves. The teacher’s evolution in their metaphors about 3D modelling ranged from metaphors indicating the demand for constant improvement and following trends, expressed through metaphors related to different professions (engineers, doctors, and scientists) in the initial period, to a focus exclusively on metaphors related to IT occupations after one year of experience. This indicates that with experience, the teachers believe that high continuous up-skilling support from the technological side is needed to successfully apply 3D modelling. This finding highlights the importance of providing teachers with the necessary training and support when introducing 3D modelling into their teaching practices. Our study supports previous research by Anđić et al. (2023c), Huang and Wang (2022), and Holzmann et al. (2020), all of which indicated that teachers need additional training to fully adopt 3D modelling and printing in their teaching practice. Analysing teachers’ metaphors about educational technologies, Koc (2013) indicates that teacher training for the application of technology in teaching should focus on the complex nature of technology, especially considering its influence on the teaching and learning processes. Based on the knowledge gained in our study and the previous research, we recommend that trainers and policymakers provide at least one year of techno-pedagogical support to teachers when introducing this technology in education.

Another conceptual category that emerged from the results is “originality versus replication”. Teachers saw 3D modelling as an opportunity to create unique models of particular value to their creators. They used the metaphor “unicorn” to express this idea, indicating that 3D modelling enables the creation of desired models that can be unique, creative, original, and of particular value. However, in the second wave, this metaphor was lost, and the dominant metaphor became the “personal touch” metaphor, indicating that the success of 3D modelling depends on the effort put into it. By using these metaphors, teachers indicated that by applying 3D modelling, already developed models can be adapted, and re-modelled to meet the needs of teachers and students. This is a remarkable result because most current research shows that 3D modelling enables the expression of originality and creativity (Weng et al., 2022; Chien, 2017; Dousay & Weible, 2019; Ford & Minshall, 2019). However, the analysis of teachers’ metaphors obtained in this study indicates that teachers believe that the expression of originality through 3D modelling depends on the user’s time commitment and IT expertise. It is important to emphasize that after three months of using 3D modelling in teaching, the teachers generated metaphors such as “copycat” or “clone”, the frequency of which increased after one year. These metaphors also indicate that teachers in teaching practice would rather use already available models with adaptation than create their own from scratch. We assume that the teachers’ concept of expressing creativity through 3D modelling changed as a result of their experience with 3D modelling. The experience probably influenced the teachers’ concepts of the high IT skill level and time requirements of the original 3D modelling when applied in the classroom. This assumption is supported by the findings of the studies by Brink et al. (2022) and Wan and Ivy (2021), who indicated that, due both to the technical and time requirements of 3D modelling, teachers may resort to using pre-existing 3D models on different platforms such as Thingiverse. We propose that further research should answer the following research question: Which factors influence secondary school teachers decisions to use 3D modelling to create an original model in teaching practice? The knowledge that these studies could potentially provide would contribute to the use of 3DMP in fostering creativity and originality in teaching, and identifying which skills teachers need to do this.

A third conceptual category that emerged from the results was “skills requirement”. The teachers indicated that 3D modelling requires a high level of digital skill, and they used metaphors such as a “spaceship” and a “Rubik’s cube” to convey this idea. The spaceship metaphor pointed to the complexity of 3D modelling, emphasizing that it is multi-dimensional and requires the careful connection of all elements to function harmoniously. The Rubik’s cube metaphor emphasised the need for patience, perseverance in navigation and spatial orientation and also highlighted the importance of logical thinking and visualisation during the 3D modelling process. These metaphors suggest that teachers may face a challenge since the process of 3D modelling requires that students are taught not only this process, but also the skills of problem-solving, specific orientation and logical, systematic and critical thinking at the same time. This study’s results show no significant difference in the generation of metaphors categorized in the Skills Requirement category between the three waves. This suggests that even after a year of using 3DMP in the classroom, teachers still view the process of 3D modelling as quite complex and challenging. These teachers’ concepts about 3D modelling coincide with the teachers’ concepts obtained in recent studies by Üçgül and Altıok (2023) and Love et al. (2022). The research results also indicate that the teachers perceive the process of 3D modelling as highly complicated. A high constant frequency (in all three waves) of metaphors such as “spaceship” and “Rubik’s Cube” in the teacher’s narrative raises questions about the compatibility of available software for 3D modelling with current educational practices. These results could be beneficial for developers of different software for 3D modelling, since they indicate that existing platforms should be improved to provide users with a better, easier, and simpler experience, which is more manageable, more straightforward, and easier to deal with.

Finally, the fourth conceptual category that emerged from the results was “knowledge contributor versus obstructionist”. The teachers used metaphors such as a “lens,” a “glass,” and a “magnifying glass” to express their views on the impact of 3D modelling on student learning. As can be seen from the teacher’s narrative (see Section 3), the teachers indicate that the application of 3D modelling opens up new horizons, enables students to interact and explore the teaching and learning material in detail, and reveals new perspectives, much like a magnifying glass. Teachers-generated metaphors also indicate that they believe that 3D modelling software enables students to see digital models in different dimensions and perspectives, which is of particular importance for their application in education. This finding highlights the potential for 3D modelling to enhance student learning and engage students in more interactive and exploratory learning experiences. These results have been seen in many previous studies (for instance, Ford & Minshall, 2019; Cheng et al., 2020). Contrary to both expectations and previous research, the teachers in this research indicated with certain metaphors, such as a social network and a fun game, that the application of 3D modelling can distract the student from the very goal of learning. Notably, the present results suggest that teachers have a concept that the process of 3D modelling can be enjoyable for students, like a game, but that if its place in the learning process itself is not well designed, it can lead to learning outcomes not being achieved. As teacher experience in using 3D modelling in teaching grows, there is a discernible decreasing trend, from the first to third wave, of metaphors that indicate the distracting impact of this tool on the learning process. This suggests that teachers’ concepts of the perceived positive pedagogical impact of 3D modelling increase as teachers gain experience using the technology. This data is fascinating considering that the perceived pedagogical implications are one of the main factors influencing the decision to use digital technologies in teaching (Šumak & Šorgo, 2016). This data can be very important for developing programmes to improve teachers’ professional development in 3DMP, as they suggest that a specific part of this training should be dedicated to developing teachers’ pedagogical skills related to 3D modeling, which would help them avoid the distracting effect of 3D modeling. Within this part of the training for teachers, pedagogical approaches should be presented that enable students and teachers alike to concentrate on achieving learning outcomes through the use of 3D modeling. In addition, organizing communities of practice for teachers interested in using 3D modeling in the classroom might help, by allowing them to share their experiences and achieve a clearer pedagogical perception of this technology. Future research should investigate this assumption. In the second subsection, we will discuss teachers’ conceptual metaphors regarding 3D printing.

4.2 Teachers’ concepts and their changes to 3D printing

The results show that teachers’ metaphors about 3D printing fell into the following five categories: (1) creation-production, (2) the facilitation of needs, (3) an educational tool, (4) innovation & creativity, and (5) a sensitive being. We will discuss each of the categories in the text below.

The first category, “creation-production,” was centred around creating a 3D-printed model. The teachers often used the metaphor of “bricklaying” to describe this process. They saw the process of 3D printing as being like laying bricks, layer by layer, until the final product was complete. Teachers in this category considered the 3D printing process to be similar to building a structure, like a mason building a wall by laying bricks. The metaphor “Bricklaying” appeared with a frequency of 9 in the three waves. These teachers’ concepts indicate that 3D printing can be used as a teaching tool, as a bridge between the ideas developed in the digital world and the physical world. One particularly interesting element is the fact that the teachers emphasise in their narratives that the 3D printing process is achieved layer by layer. This suggests that teachers view the 3D printing process as systematic and detailed, enabling students to understand the 3D structure. Similar teacher concepts have also been registered in previous research by Anđić et al. (2022), and Muramatsu et al. (2019), indicating a form of understanding of the 3D printing process on the part of teachers. The results of our research detected a decreasing growth of the concepts expressed in the Creation-Production category from the first to the third wave. It is interesting to note that immediately after the workshop, teachers focused more on the 3D printing process itself. By contrast, after a year of implementation in the classroom, they focused more on the benefits that this process brings to the classroom. One of the potential reasons for the dominance of these concepts in the first wave could be the novice effect. Compared to beginners, more experienced teachers pay attention to different details and interpret information differently when new educational technology is introduced (Wolff et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2011). Our results indicate that at the beginning of the application of 3D printing in teaching, teachers are mostly focused on the process of model printing. However, after gaining three months and one year of experience in teaching with 3D printing, teachers shift their focus away from the printing process toward the printers’ technical characteristics and the benefits they bring to the classroom, described in the following categories.

The second category concerning 3D printing, “the facilitation of needs”, focused on the ability of 3D printing to adapt to users’ specific needs. The two most common metaphors in this category were a “magical sculptor” and a “private personal factory”. These metaphors emphasized that 3D printing is a tool that can create custom models based on the user’s designs and needs, in much the same way a magician-sculptor might create a custom sculpture based on a client’s specifications. This implies that teachers have ideas on how to use 3D printing with different groups of students, such as gifted students or students with disabilities. Our research results indicate no changes in the frequency of generated metaphors related to teachers opinions about the possibilities of 3D printing to facilitate different student needs between the three waves. This insight is valuable for educators looking for innovative ways to adapt their teaching to students’ characteristics and needs and encourage them to work together. In similar studies examining teachers’ metaphors about different educational technologies, such as smartphones (Gezgin et al., 2019) and technology-supported distance learning (Kan & Özmen, 2021), teachers have produced metaphors that have been classified into similar categories. As stated in those studies, the high frequency of conceptual metaphors in this category indicates that teachers understand the concept that students can use the technology provided with different educational needs. Regarding 3D printing, this teacher’s concept is supported by a range of experimental studies (Anđić et al. 2023a; Di Tore et al., 2022).

The third category, “an educational tool”, included metaphors related directly to the application of 3D printing in education. The most frequent metaphor in this category was “navigation” or an “explorer”. This suggests that teachers have ideas about how 3D printing can be used as a teaching tool to facilitate an active and dynamic learning process that promotes students’ understanding of the purpose of learning and the importance of achieving planned objectives. This also suggests that teachers believe that 3D printing can stimulate students’ curiosity and interest in investigation. The results of our research show that teachers’ ideas about 3D printers as a teaching tool remained unchanged across the three waves of data collection. It substantiates previous findings in the literature that indicate that 3D printing contributes to multiple learning content representation and enables intensive research and the perception of scientific content on the part of students (Anđić et al., 2022; Steed, 2019; Üçgül & Altıok, 2023). Our results also support the findings of previous studies (e.g. Anđić et al., 2022), which found that 3D printing can contribute to students’ understanding of the purpose of learning through the creation of tangible products.

The fourth category, “innovation & creativity,” included metaphors that saw 3D printing as a tool for innovation and creativity. The most frequent metaphor in this category was that of an “artist”. The teacher metaphors in this category saw 3D printing as a tool that could be used to create original works of art, being similar to an artist using their tools and materials to create a painting or sculpture. Teachers’ ideas about the use of 3D printing remained unchanged in all three waves of data collection. This suggests that when teachers start using 3D printing in the classroom and after a year of experience, they have an idea of how they can use this technology to encourage creativity and innovation in students. This is consistent with the results provided by Sullivan and McCartney (2017), in which teachers held concepts about 3D printing as a modern way to express creativity. We should particularly point out that in the conceptual categories of 3D modelling, originality versus replication, teachers believe that 3D modelling can be used for developing originals or using other people’s ideas. On the other hand, they see the 3D printing process as a process for innovation and originality. We assume that the reason for this is the complicated 3D modelling process. Our assumption is based on similar previous research by Brink et al. (2022) and Wan and Ivy (2021), which point to the high complexity of 3D modelling. This suggests that for the application of 3DMP as a teaching tool to foster creativity and innovation, 3D modelling is still a challenge for teachers. These findings could be of particular importance to developers of 3D modelling software, as the results suggest that developing or improving teachers’ user experience of this software might contribute to its greater implementation in the classroom.

The final category, “a sensitive being” included metaphors that conveyed the teachers’ concerns about the sensitivity and distractibility of the 3D printing process. The most common metaphor in this category was a “spider”. The teachers saw the 3D printing process as delicate and easily disturbed, much like a spider’s web. However, in the course of the evolution of teachers’ metaphors about 3D printing from the first to the third wave, the metaphors in this category gradually grew. The major difference was between the first and second waves. In the first wave, teachers did not present conceptual beliefs that indicated the sensitivity or ease of disruption of 3D printers in class. However, these conceptual beliefs appeared from the second wave and persisted even after a year of experience in using this technology. By using metaphors such as a “spider” in higher frequencies after one year of experience than in the earlier phase of using 3D printing, teachers faced obstacles that led them to perceive this technology as delicate and fragile. This indicates that, in the teacher’s opinion, an optimal, undisturbed environment should be provided for successful 3D printing in the classroom. This category is very interesting because, in previous research, we could not find similar concepts provided by teachers related to the sensitivity of the 3D printer and the printing process. One of the reasons for the emergence of this conception of 3D printing in this research may be the application of the methodology of conceptual metaphors. However, in recent literature reviews, Pearson and Dubé (2022) and Ford and Minshall (2019) pointed out that for the successful use of 3DMP in teaching, a satisfactory pedagogical technological environment that enables the successful use of this technology in teaching must be created. Our research adds to this knowledge in that when creating this environment, special attention should be paid to the instability of the 3D printer’s environment, among other factors, to make the printing process as successful as possible.

Summarizing the findings of our study, it can be concluded that for the successful application of 3DMP in the classroom, the initial training of teachers and equipping schools with 3D printers and printing materials is not enough; instead, providing ongoing support is crucial. This ongoing support should focus primarily on providing teachers with guidance on how to use 3DMP to encourage and develop creativity and originality in the classroom. The results of this research suggest that teachers perceive that the existing 3D modelling software complicates the process of using 3DMP in the classroom and hinders the expression of innovation and creativity. In this regard the development of simple 3D modelling software, which should be developed in collaboration between developers, teachers and educational researchers is of particular importance. In addition, teachers need pedagogical training that provides them with the knowledge on how to use 3D modelling software in the classroom. Based on the findings of this study as well as similar previous studies (Anđić et al., 2022; Brink et al., 2022; Ford & Minshall, 2019), we recommend the following pedagogical approaches to teacher training development for the use of 3DMP in the classroom: (a) Setting small, clear tasks for modelling that require students to acquire the relevant knowledge of the particular subject, e.g. in groups, instead of developing a model of a chemical molecule, students could model its atoms and obtain a whole model by assembling it at class level; (b) Interdisciplinary school projects - in these, students could create sculptures, mixed media works, or modern art pieces by merging art with technology using digitally modeling and 3D printing artworks; and (c) Connecting 3DMP to the real world: teachers can assign students to create a model that solves a real-world problem, such as developing a classroom model that is needed by the school and cannot be purchased. Providing this technical and pedagogical support is critical in the early months of using 3DMP in the classroom. It would most likely contribute to a more successful overall integration of this technology into the classroom.

5 Conclusion

This study aimed to examine the change in the conceptual metaphors about 3D modelling and 3D printing among secondary school teachers over three waves of data collection. The study results showed that the teachers generated a significant number of metaphorical expressions to describe their views on the application of 3D modelling and 3D printing in teaching. We revealed nine main conceptual categories that emerged from the teachers’ concepts. Our studies make three main contributions to previous studies. First, our study shows that teachers believe that 3D modelling software is more suitable for redesigning and adapting existing models than for developing new models. This may have a negative impact on the use of 3DMP in the classroom as a means of fostering creativity and innovation. Secondly, the results of our study suggest that at the beginning of using 3DMP in the classroom, teachers may believe that 3D modelling can have a destructive effect on students’ knowledge acquisition. By contrast, this perception disappears with increasing experience in the classroom. This suggests that teachers need on-going pedagogical support to successfully utilize 3DMP in classroom practice. Finally, this shows teachers’ opinions on the sensitivity of 3D printers. Teachers think that 3D printers are very sensitive and easily disruptive in the classroom. For the successful implementation of 3DMP in the classroom, further improvements are needed in these areas mentioned by the teachers. Overall, the study emphasizes the necessity for comprehensive ongoing support and targeted training to enable educators to effectively integrate 3D modelling and printing into educational practices, while still fostering creativity and addressing technical complexities.

There are two limitations in our study. First, the participants in our study were recruited following the purposive sampling approach, and all of them were trained to use 3DMP in teaching. This limits the generalisability of the findings beyond the population of teachers who have received similar training. Future studies could focus on teachers who entered the 3DMP implementation process through self-training or peer education. In addition, our longitudinal study covered only a one-year period during data collection. Future research should investigate how teachers’ conceptual metaphors about 3DMP change over two or more years of experience. By doing so, future studies would provide a comprehensive insight into teachers’ conceptual beliefs about this innovative field.