Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Ambiguity Tolerance during the Adoption of Maker-Centered Learning Tools and Strategies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
TechTrends Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Maker-centered learning is a creative hands-on educational strategy that uses a variety of tools and materials to support the iterative design of physical or digital artifacts. It involves the “messy” process of trial and error; therefore, authentic integration of maker-centered learning requires teachers to embrace ambiguity. This descriptive case study explores how two in-service teacher participants tolerate ambiguity through unpacking the ways that they process, interpret, and react to ambiguous stimuli. The study uses participants’ weekly reflections during a 15-week course focused on tools and strategies to support maker-centered learning. Findings highlight examples of how participants’ experiences connect to the four ambiguity constructs (i.e., complexity, insolubility, uncertainty, unfamiliarity) and the dual roles of ambiguity as a learner and ambiguity as a teacher. Implications for teacher educators who design maker-centered learning professional development experiences are also discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Başöz, T. (2015). Exploring the relationship between tolerance of ambiguity of EFL learners and their vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 11(2), 53–66

  • Bevan, B. (2017). The promise and the promises of making in science education. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 75–103. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380.

  • Blikstein, P., Martinez, S, L., & Pang, H, A. (2016). Meaningful making, projects and inspirations for fablabs and makerspaces. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press

  • Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30(1), 29–50.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x

  • Calabrese Barton, A. & Tan, E. (2018). A longitudinal study of equity-oriented STEM-rich making among youth from historically marginalized communities. American Educational Research Journal, 55(4), 761–800. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218758668.

  • Clapp, E, P. (2015). Reconsidering failure in maker-centered learning. Agency by Design. http://www.agencybydesign.org/node/310

  • Clapp, E, P., Ross, J., Ryan, J, O., & Tishman, S. (2017). Maker-centered learning: Empowering young people to shape their worlds. Jossey-Bass

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

  • DeRoma, V, M., Martin, K, M., & Kessler, M, L. (2003). The relationship between tolerance for ambiguity and need for course structure. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(2), 104–109

  • Durrheim, K., & Foster, D. (1997). Tolerance of ambiguity as a content specific construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(5), 741–750

  • Fong, C., Schallert, D., Williams, K., Williamson, Z., Warner, J., Lin, S., Kim, Y. (2018). When feedback signals failure but offers hope for improvement: A process model of constructive criticism. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.014

  • Frenkel-Brunswick, E. (1949). Tolerance toward ambiguity as a personality variable. American Psychologist, 3, 268

  • Frenkel-Brunswick, E. (1951). Personality theory and perception. In R. Blake, & E. Ramsey (Eds.), Perception: An approach to personality. Ronald. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/11505-013.

  • Furnham, A. & Marks, J. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the recent literature. Psychology , 4(9), 717–728

  • Henriksen, D., & Mishra, P. (2015). We teach who we are: Creativity in the lives and practices of exceptional teachers. Teachers College Record. 117(7). p. 1–46

  • Honey, M. & Kanter, D. (Eds.), (2013). Design, make, play. Taylor and Francis

  • Hultman, G. (2008). Ambiguity as work: Teachers' knowledge creation in classrooms. New Zealand Journal Of Teachers’ Work, 5(1), 21–35

  • Jones, M., Cohen, J., Schad, M., Caratachea, M., & Smith, S. (2019). Maker-centered teacher professional development: Examining K-12 teachers’ learning experiences in a commercial makerspace. Tech Trends. , 37-49. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00425-y

  • Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424

  • Lai, P., Portolese, A., & Jacobson, M. (2017). Does sequence matter? Productive failure and designing online authentic learning for process engineering. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1217–1227. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12492

  • Levitt, D., & Jacques, J. (2005). Promoting tolerance for ambiguity in counselor training programs. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, 44(1), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-490X.2005.tb00055.x

  • Maltese, A., Simpson, A., & Anderson, A. (2018). Failing to learn: The impact of failures during making activities. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30, 116–134. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.01.003

  • Manolo, E. & Kapur, M. (2018). The role of failure in promoting thinking skills and creativity: New findings and insights about how failure can be beneficial for learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 30, 1–6

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

  • Martinez (2013) 12/17/13 http://sylviamartinez.com/failure-is-not-an-option-unless-it-is

  • Martinez, S, L., & Stager, G, S. (2013). Invent to learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.

  • Matthews, M. (2019). Ethos of ambiguity: Artist teachers and the transparency exclusion paradox. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(4), 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12277

  • McLain, D, L. (1993). The MSTAT-I: A news measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 183–189

  • McLain, D, L. (2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale-II (MSTAT-II). Psychological Reports, (3), 975. doi:https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.105.3.975-988.

  • McLain, D, L., Kefallonitis, E., & Armani, K. (2015). Ambiguity tolerance in organizations: Definitional clarification and perspectives on future research. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 344. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00344

  • Miles, M, B., Huberman, A, M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE Publications, Inc

  • Oliver, K. (2016). Professional development considerations for makerspace leaders, part one: Addressing “what?” and “why?”. Tech Trends. 60, 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0028-5

  • Paganelli, A., Cribbs, J, D., Huang, X., Pereira, N., Huss, J., Chandler, W., & Paganelli, A. (2016). The makerspace experience and teacher professional development. Professional Development in Education, 43(2), 1–4. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1166448.

  • Peppler, K, A., Halverson, E., Kafai, Y, B. (2016). Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (volume 1). Routledge

  • Petrich, M., Wilkinson, K., & Bevan, B. (2013). It looks like fun, but are they learning?. In M. Honey & D. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play (pp. 50–70). Taylor and Francis

  • Rodriguez, S., Harron, J., Fletcher, S., & Spock, H. (2018). Elements of making: A framework to support making in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 85(2). https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst18_085_02_24

  • Rodriguez, S., Smith, S., & Haron, J. (2021). Analyzing the development of science and mathematics teachers’ maker-centered philosophy and instructional practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE). 21(1). Available at: https://citejournal.org/volume-21/issue-1-21/science/analyzing-the-development-of-science-and-mathematics-teachers-maker-centered-philosophy-and-instructional-practices

  • Smith, S. (2018). Making visual connections: Children’s negotiations of visualization skills during a design-based learning experience with non-digital techniques and digital fabrication technologies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 12(2), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1747

  • Smith, S. (2015). Epic fails: Reconceptualizing failure as a catalyst for developing creative persistence within teaching and learning experiences. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 23(3), 329–355. Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

  • Smith, H., & Strong, D, S. (2018). Creative confidence and the arts: Measuring a potential contributing factor to students’ motivation to engage in engineering creativity. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) Conference, June 3-6, 2018 Vancouver BC, 1-6

  • Smith, S., Talley, K., Ortiz, A., & Sriraman, V. (2021). You want me to teach engineering?: Impacts of recurring experiences on K-12 teachers’ engineering design self-efficacy, familiarity with engineering, and confidence to teach with design-based learning pedagogy. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research

  • Tegano, D, W., Groves, M, M., & Catron, C, E. (2006). Early childhood teachers’ playfulness and ambiguity tolerance: Essential elements of encouraging creative potential of children. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 20(3), 291–300, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0163638990200307

  • Thomas, A., & Besser, D. (2017). The maker movement and engineering. Bridge, 47(3), 32–36

  • Trninic, D., Wagner, R. & Kapur, M. (2018). Rethinking failure in mathematics education: A historical appeal. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30, 76-89. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.008.

  • Tseng, W. (2018). Can visual ambiguity facilitate design ideation?. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 28, 523–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9393-9.

  • Weissenstein, A., Ligges, S., Brouwer, B., Marschall, B., & Friederichs, H. (2014). Measuring the ambiguity tolerance of medical students: A cross-sectional study from the first to sixth academic. BioMedCentral Family Practice, 15(6). DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-15-6

  • Yin, R, K. (2012). Applications of Case Study Research, edition 3, Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA.

  • Ziegler, E. & Kapur, M. (2018). The interplay of creativity, failure and learning in generating algebra problems. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30, 64–75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.009.

Further Reading

  • Author, A., et al., (2016)

  • Hollis, J. (2009). What matters most: Living a more considered life. Penguin Books Ltd

  • Rittschof, K, A., (2016). Improving Measurement of Ambiguity Tolerance Among Teacher Candidates. Georgia Educational Research Association Conference. 25

  • Searle, K., Litts, B., & Kafai, Y. (2018). Debugging open-ended designs: High school students’ perceptions of failure and success in an electronic textiles design activity. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.004.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hawaii System, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Shaunna Smith

  2. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Shelly Rodriguez

Authors
  1. Shaunna Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shelly Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaunna Smith.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, S., Rodriguez, S. Exploring Ambiguity Tolerance during the Adoption of Maker-Centered Learning Tools and Strategies. TechTrends 65, 653–667 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00600-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00600-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation