Keywords
Digital Fabrication
Adolescents
Interests
MINT
FabLab
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sophie Uhing, Kathrin Smolarczyk, Karina Oliveira, Nazmun Ontika, Rolf Becker, Stephan Kröner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
Science-practice-cooperation in STEM education facilitates the bidirectional exchange of knowledge. This is especially relevant when developing concepts that provide low-threshold access to digital technology through Fab Labs or makerspaces, which aim to foster the development of interests and motivational beliefs. Concepts that help to attract children and young people to these learning venues both in the short term (situational interest) and in the long term (individual interest) need to be developed. For the latter, cross-setting concepts that specifically involve schools, families, and peers are helpful. Involvement of STEM stakeholders in concept development is crucial for the design of workshops and activities. This article demonstrates how focus group discussions can be used for science-practice cooperation: First, conditions for successfully promoting both situational and individual interest in STEM and making activities were investigated in empirical studies conducted as a part of the BMBFSFJ joint project EnvironMINT. Subsequently, a cross-setting concept was derived from the implications and further developed in focus group discussions with STEM stakeholders. The involvement of STEM stakeholders is discussed.
References
Braun, Virginia, und Victoria Clarke. 2006. «Using thematic analysis in psychology». Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Bronfenbrenner, Urie. 1981. Die Ökologie der menschlichen Entwicklung. Natürliche und geplante Experimente. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
Brown, Tim. 2008. «Design thinking». Harvard Business Review 86 (6): 84 – 92 141. https://designthinkingmeite.web.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/22337/2020/02/Tim-Brown-Design-Thinking.pdf.
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. 2021. Bekanntmachung. Richtlinie zur Förderung von Forschungsprojekten zu Gelingensbedingungen guter MINT-Bildung. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (Bundesanzeiger vom 22. 03. 2021). https://www.bmftr.bund.de/SharedDocs/Bekanntmachungen/DE/2021/03/3475_bekanntmachung.html.
Davies, Sini, und Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen. 2025. «Research on K-12 maker education in the early 2020s – a systematic literature review». International Journal of Technology and Design Education 35 (2): 763 – 788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09921-6.
Farley-Ripple, Elizabeth, Henry May, Allison Karpyn, Katherine Tilley, Kalyn McDonough. 2018. «Rethinking connections between research and practice in education: A conceptual framework». Educational Researcher 47 (4): 235 – 245. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18761042.
Gershenfeld, Neil. 2012. «How to make almost anything: The digital fabrication revolution». Foreign Affairs, 43 – 57.
Ghadiri-Mohajerzad, Hadjar, und Josef Schrader. 2024. «Der Transfer von bildungswissenschaftlichem Wissen – Aspekte eines vielschichtigen Konzepts mit einer langen Tradition». In Wissenstransfer im Bildungsbereich, herausgegeben von Hadjar Ghadiri-Mohajerzad und Josef Schrader. Wiesbaden: Springer, 19 – 53.
Gräsel, Cornelia. 2010. «Stichwort: Transfer und Transferforschung im Bildungsbereich». Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 13 (1): 7 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-010-0109-8.
Hidi, Suzanne, und K. Ann Renninger. 2006. «The four-phase model of interest development». Educational Psychologist 41 (2): 111 – 127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.
Hjalmarsson, Simon. 2023. «Pay to play? Economic constraints and participation in extracurricular activities». European Sociological Review 39 (4): 586 – 600. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcac061.
Holzer, Julia, Luisa Grützmacher, Sina Ludwig, Johann Bacher, Hanna Dumont, Nele Kampa et al. 2025. «Bildung gemeinsam gestalten: Empfehlungen für Projekte in Kooperation zwischen Wissenschaft, Politik und Praxis». Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 28 (1): 151 – 179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-024-01273-0.
Kerres, Michael, Pia Sander, und Bettina Waffner. 2022. «Zum Zusammenwirken von Bildungsforschung und Bildungspraxis: Gestaltungsorientierte Bildungsforschung als Ko-Konstruktion. Bildungsforschung» (2022) 2, 1 – 20. bildungsforschung. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:25457.
Kompetenzzentrum Technik-Diversity-Chancengleichheit e. V. 2008 – 2021. Experimente | Komm, mach MINT. https://www.komm-mach-mint.de/experimente. Letzter Zugriff am 06. 09. 2026.
Krapp, Andreas. 1992. «Interesse, Lernen und Leistung. Neue Forschungsansätze in der Pädagogischen Psychologie». Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 38 (5): 747 – 770. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:13977.
Krapp, Andreas. 2002. «Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective». Learning and Instruction 12 (4): 383 – 409. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00011-1.
Krapp, Andreas, Manfred Prenzel. 2011. «Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings». International Journal of Science Education 33 (1): 27 – 50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645.
Kröner, Stephan. 2013. «Kulturelle Partizipation bei Jugendlichen als Feld der Person-Umwelt-Transaktion». Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 16 (S3): 233 – 256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-013-0432-y.
Narr, Kristin. 2025. Maker Werkstatt für Eltern. im Auftrag von IQES online. https://www.iqesonline.net/bildung-digital/unterrichtspraxis-erfahrungsberichte-lernumgebungen/werkzeugkoffer-making-in-der-schule/maker-werkstatt-fuer-eltern/. Letzter Zugriff am 06. 09. 2026.
Ontika, Nazmun Nisat, und Karina Oliveira. 2025. Future Academy Handbook. https://osf.io/k96gu/overview.
Peppler, Kylie, und Sophia Bender. 2013. «Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time». Phi Delta Kappan 95 (3): 22 – 27. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500306.
Raabe, Isabel J., Zsófia Boda, und Christoph Stadtfeld. 2019. «The social pipeline: How friend influence and peer exposure widen the STEM gender gap». Sociology of Education 92 (2): 105 – 123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718824095.
Ryan, Richard M., und Edward L. Deci. 2000. «Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being». The American psychologist 55 (1): 68 – 78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
Sander, Pia, Katja Buntins, und Michael Kerres. 2025. «Uni- und bidirektionaler Wissenstransfer». MedienPädagogik 65: 183 – 205. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/65/2025.07.24.X.
Sheridan, Kimberly, Erica Rosenfeld Halverson, Breanne Litts, Lisa Brahms, Lynette Jacobs-Priebe, und Trevor Owens. 2014. «Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces». Harvard Educational Review 84 (4): 505 – 531. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.brr34733723j648u.
Smolarczyk, Kathrin, und Stephan Kröner. 2023. «Two decades in the making: A scoping review on research on digital making and its potential for digital empowerment in non-formal settings». Journal of Research on Technology in Education 55 (3): 459 – 476. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1974987.
Smolarczyk, Kathrin, Marios Mouratidis, Sophie Uhing, Rolf Becker, und Stephan Kröner. 2024. «Let’s get them on board: Focus group discussions with adolescents on empowering leisure engagement in Fab Labs and makerspaces». International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 41: 100669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100669.
Smolarczyk, Kathrin, Magdalena Virgo, Omed Abed, und Rolf Becker. 2025a. «Design-based research and design thinking in the Fab Lab: Developing an intervention to spark empowering making activities among children and adolescents». International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 45: 100763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2025.100763.
Smolarczyk, Kathrin, Magdalena Virgo, Omed Abed, und Rolf Becker. 2025b. Handbuch freizeitliches Making. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/C3W25.
Stiftung Kinder forschen. 2025. Experimente für Kinder. https://www.stiftung-kinder-forschen.de/praxisanregungen/experimente-fuer-kinder/. Letzter Zugriff am 06. 09. 2026.
Thomas, Julie, Juliana Utley, Soo-Young Hong, Hunkar Korkmaz, und Gwen Nugent. 2020. «Parent involvement and its influence on children’s STEM learning: A review of the research». In Handbook of research on STEM education, herausgegeben von Carla C. Johnson, Margaret J. Mohr-Schroeder, Tamara J. Moore, und Lyn English. New York: Routledge, 323 – 338.
Uhing, Sophie, und Stephan Kröner. 2025. Projekt-EnvironMINT: Materialien zum settingübergreifenden Konzept. https://osf.io/873cv/overview.
Uhing, Sophie, und Stephan Kröner. 2026. «Fostering autonomy and utility in making activities: A video vignette study». In Vorbereitung.
Uhing, Sophie, Kathrin Smolarczyk, Marios Mouratidis, und Stephan Kröner. 2026. «Recreational making–related beliefs in adolescents: Developing a comprehensive belief category system». In Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-026-13969-3.
Vedder-Weiss, Dana, und David Fortus. 2013. «School, teacher, peers, and parents’ goals emphases and adolescents’ motivation to learn science in and out of school». Journal of Research in Science Teaching 50 (8): 952 – 988. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21103.
Zimmerman, Heather Toomey, Katharine Ellen Grills, Zachary McKinley, und Soo Hyeon Kim. 2022. «Families’ engagement in making activities related to aerospace engineering: designing for parents as learning partners in pop-up makerspaces». Information and Learning Sciences 123 (3/4): 154 – 178. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-08-2020-0190.
Zügge, Thomas, und Lars Höft. 2025. «Interessentheorien revisited. Ein Überblick gängiger Interessenbegriffe und damit verbundener Beschreibungen der Interessenentwicklung». In Interesse revisited, herausgegeben von Olaf Krey, Sascha Bernholt, Daniel Laumann, und Thorid Rabe. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 1 – 49.