The use of 3D-printed instructional materials in active learning activities within science lessons

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the effect of active learning activities utilizing 3D-printed instructional materials on students’ academic achievement and to explore their perceptions of these activities in science lessons. Specifically, the research focuses on the 6th-grade unit “Systems in Our Body and Health,” where 3D-printed instructional materials were produced and integrated into classroom activities. The study was structured as a “sequential mixed research design” since qualitative and quantitative data were collected one after the other. The experimental group, which received the intervention, comprised 30 students, while the control group, which underwent the conventional science lesson process, included 28 students. Students who engaged in active learning activities utilizing 3D-printed instructional materials in the science lessons demonstrated higher academic achievement compared to their peers who did not participate. In the semi-structured interviews, the experimental group students commented that the activities helped them understand the subject because 3D materials allowed them to see and touch the content from different angles.

Keywords

• 3D printers
• 3D-printed instructional materials
• science education
• active learning
• academic achievement

References

1. AbouHashem,Y., Dayal, M., Savanah, S., & Štrkalj, G. (2015). The application of 3D printing in anatomy education, Medical Education Online, 20(1), 29847.
2. Açıkgöz, K. Ü. (2003). Aktif öğrenme [Active Learning]. Eğitim Dünyası Yayınları [Education World Publications].
3. Adams, J. W., Paxton, L., Dawes, K., Burlak, K., Quayle, M., & McMenamin, P. G. (2015). 3D printed reproductions of orbital dissections: a novel mode of visualising anatomy for trainees in ophthalmology or optometry. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 99(9), 1162-1167. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-306189
4. Addy, T. M., Dube, D., & Pauze, B. (2018). How to Design a Classroom Activity that Integrates 3D Print Models with Active Learning. CourseSource. https://doi.org/10.24918/cs.2018.8
5. Agrahari, R. (2016). The nature of educational reform and change: From teacher-centered to student-centered learning. Educational Quest-An International Journal of Education and Applied Social Sciences, 7(2), 133-139. https://doi.org/10.5958/2230-7311.2016.00030.1
6. Aktın, K., Karademir Coşkun, T., & Karaçalı Taze, H. (2023). The use of 3D printers in education from the perspective of social sciences teachers. Black Sea Journal of Social Sciences, 15(29), 465-489. https://doi.org/10.38155/ksbd.1171741
7. Avinal, M., & Aydin, A. (2022). The Effects of activities designed with three-dimensional printing technology on science education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(3), 887-910. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.155
8. Awacorach, J., Jensen, I., Lassen, I., Olanya, D. R., Zakaria, H. L., & Tabo, G. O. (2021). Exploring Transition in Higher Education: Engagement and Challenges in Moving from Teacher-Centered to Student-Centered Learning. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 9(2), 113-130. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1337873.pdf

9. Baepler, P., Walker, J.D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers and Education, 78, 227–236.
10. Barroso, L.R., Bicer, A., Capraro, M.M., Capraro, R.M., Foran, A.L., Grant, M.R., & Rice, D. (2017). Run! Spot. Run!: vocabulary development and the evolution of STEM disciplinary language for secondary teachers. ZDM, 49(2), 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0826-4
11. Bialy, S. E. (2016). The 3D printing age and basic sciences education. Education in Medicine Journal, 8(4), 79-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.5959/eimj.v8i4.458
12. Buehler, E., Kane, S. K., & Hurst, A. (2014). ABC and 3D: opportunities and obstacles to 3D printing in special education environments. In Proceedings of the 16th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers & accessibility, 107-114.
13. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (1998). Kovaryans analizi ( Varyans Analizi ile Karşılaştırmalı Bir İnceleme ). Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 31(1), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000247
14. Cheng, L., Antonenko, P. D., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2024). The impact of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs, self-efficacy, and technology value beliefs on 3D printing integration in K-12 science classrooms. Educational technology research and development, 72(1), 181-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10276-3
15. Chien, Y. H. (2017). Developing a pre-engineering curriculum for 3D printing skills for high school technology education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2941-2958. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00729a
16. Chiu, P. H. P., & Cheng, S. H. (2017). Effects of active learning classrooms on student learning: a two-year empirical investigation on student perceptions and academic performance. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(2), 269-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1196475
17. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis fort the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
18. Cohen, H. G. (1992). Two teaching strategies: Their effectiveness with students of varying cognitive abilities. School Science and Mathematics, 92(3), 126-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb12157.x
19. Costello, J. P., Olivieri, L. J., Krieger, A., Thabit, O., Marshall, M. B., Yoo, S. J., Kim, P. C., Jonas, R. A., & Nath, D. S. (2014). Utilizing Three-Dimensional Printing Technology to Assess the Feasibility of High-Fidelity Synthetic Ventricular Septal Defect Models for Simulation in Medical Education, World Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery, 5(3), 421–426, https://doi.org/10.1177/2150135114528721
20. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Çoklar, A. N., & Çekirge, E. (2020). The effect of supporting 3D designs with physical materials on academic achievement, course attitude and motivation. Journal of Ahmet Kelesoglu Education Faculty, 2(2), 181-193. https://doi.org/10.38151/akef.2020.3
22. Demir, E. B. K., Çaka, C., Tuğtekin, U., Demir, K., İslamoğlu, H. & Kuzu, A. (2016). The use of three dimensional printing technologies in education: practices in Turkey. Ege Journal of Education, 2(17), 481-503. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.280754
23. Eisenberg, M. (2007). Pervasive fabrication: Making construction ubiquitous in education. In Fifth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerComW'07) (pp. 193-198). IEEE.
24. Fernandes, S. C., & Simoes, R. (2016). Collaborative use of different learning styles through 3D printing. In 2016 2nd International Conference of the Portuguese Society for Engineering Education (CISPEE) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
25. Ford, S. & Minshall, T. (2019). Invited review article: Where and how 3D printing is used in teaching and education. Additive Manufacturing, 25, 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2018.10.028
26. Frigon, J. Y. & Laurencelle, L. (1993). Analysis of covariance: A proposed algorithm, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001001
27. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (10. ed.). Pearson.
28. Güleryüz, H., Dilber, R., & Erdoğan, İ. (2019). Prospective teachers' views on 3D printer use in STEM Applications. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 5(2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.592061
29. Hatch, M. (2013). The maker movement manifesto: rules for innovation in the new world of crafters, hackers, and tinkerers. McGraw Hill Professional.
30. Hockings, C. (2009). Reaching the students that student‐centred learning cannot reach, British Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 83-98, https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920802041640
31. Horowitz, S. S., & Schultz, P. H. (2014). Printing space: Using 3D printing of digital terrain models in geosciences education and research. Journal of Geoscience Education, 62(1), 138-145. https://doi.org/10.5408/13-031.1
32. Huang, T. C., & Lin, C. Y. (2017). From 3D modeling to 3D printing: Development of a differentiated spatial ability teaching model. Telematics and Informatics, 34(2), 604-613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.10.005
33. Jo, W., Hee I. J., Harianto, R. A., So, J. H., Lee, H., Lee, H. J., & Moon, M. (2016). Introduction of 3d printing technology in the classroom for visually ımpaired students. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 110(2), 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1611000205
34. Karaduman, H. (2018). Abstract to concrete & virtual to real: Three-dimensional printers from the perspective of teacher candidates. Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 18 (1), 273-303. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/372300
35. Karagöz, B., & Çakır, Ç. Ş. (2020). Determination of science teacher candidates' opinions about 3D printers. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(2), 303-317. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kebd/issue/67544/1051092
36. Kargın, P. D., & Gül, Ş. (2021). Development of an achievement test for sixth grade body systems and health unit, Ihlara Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.47479/ihead.729412
37. Kefalis, C., Skordoulis, C., & Drigas, A. (2024). The role of 3D printing in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education in general and special schools. International Journal of Online & Biomedical Engineering, 20(12). https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v20i12.48931
38. Khefrianti, S., Kadarohman, A., Wiji, & Praginda, W. (2024). Advantages and disadvantages of using 3D printing by science teachers. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(8), 559–565. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i8.6518
39. Kökhan, S. & Özcan, U. (2018). Use of 3D printers in education. Science Education Art and Technology Journal (SEAT Journal), 2(1), 81-85. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/624966
40. Kwon, H. (2017). Effects of 3D printing and design software on students' overall performance. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 18(4), 37-42. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/181996/
41. Lau, I., & Sun, Z. (2022). The role of 3D printed heart models in immediate and long-term knowledge acquisition in medical education. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, 23(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2301022
42. Leach, N. (2017). Size matters: Why architecture is the future of 3D printing. Architectural Design, 87(6), 76-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2241
43. Li, F., Liu, C., Song, X., Huan, Y., Gao, S. & Z. Jiang. (2017). Production of accurate skeletal models of domestic animals using three-dimensional scanning and printing technology. Anatomical sciences education, 11(1), 73-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1725
44. Lim, K. H. A., Loo, Z. Y., Goldie, S. J., Adams, J. W., & McMenamin, P. G. (2016). Use of 3D printed models in medical education: A randomized control trial comparing 3D prints versus cadaveric materials for learning external cardiac anatomy. Anatomical sciences education, 9(3), 213-221. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1573
45. Lipson, H. (2007). Printable 3D models for customized hands-on education. Mass Customization and Personalization (MCPC), 6. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=ed065966ded9de7862a04b9779baf2cbbaed856d
46. McMenamin, P. G., Quayle, M. R., McHenry, C. R., & Adams, J. W. (2014). The production of anatomical teaching resources using three‐dimensional (3D) printing technology. Anatomical sciences education, 7(6), 479-486. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1475
47. Mertkan, Ş. (2015). Karma Araştırma Tasarımı [Blended Research Design]. Pegem Akademi [Pegem Academy].
48. Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting Active Learning. Strategies for the College Classroom. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
49. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage.
50. Murray, S. (2013). Turning students into engineers with 3D printing. Tech Directions, 73 (1), 12-14.
51. Novak, E. & Wisdom, S. (2018). Effects of 3D printing project-based learning on preservice elementary teachers’ science attitudes, science content knowledge, and anxiety about teaching science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(5), 412-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9733-5
52. Özden, M. Y., & Durdu, L. (2016). Qualitative research methods for production-based studies in education, Anı.
53. Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68(5), 749–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0
54. Salter, D., Thomson, D. L., Fox, B., & Lam, J. (2013). Use and evaluation of a technology-rich experimental collaborative classroom. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(5), 805–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.777033
55. Saorin, J. L., Carbonell-Carrera, C., Cantero, J. D. L. T., Meier, C., & Aleman, D. D. (2017). Three-dimensional interpretation of sculptural heritage with digital and tangible 3D printed replicas. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(4), 161-169. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1160651.pdf
56. Schelly, C., Anzalone, G., Wijnen, B. & Pearce, J. M. (2015). Open-source 3-D printing technologies for education: Bringing additive manufacturing to the classroom. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 28, 226-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvlc.2015.01.004
57. Schneider, D. (2006). FAB: The coming revolution on your desktop--from personal computers to personal fabrication. American Scientist, 94(3), 284-285.
58. Sitompul, L. R., Wibawa, B., & Siregar, E. (2024). Applications of 3D printing in science education. In 7th International Conference on Learning Innovation and Quality Education (ICLIQE 2023) (pp. 786-797). Atlantis Press.
59. Smith, C. F., Tollemache, N., Covill, D., & Johnston, M. (2018). Take away body parts! An investigation into the use of 3D‐printed anatomical models in undergraduate anatomy education. Anatomical sciences education, 11(1), 44-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1718
60. Stice, J. (1987). Using Kolb’s learning cycle to improve student learning. Engineering Education, 77(7), 291-196.
61. Wisdom, S., & Novak, E. (2019). Using 3D printing to enhance STEM teaching and learning: Recommendations for designing 3D printing projects. In Integrating 3D Printing into Teaching and Learning, 187-205.
62. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Yayıncılık [Seçkin Publishing].
63. Yıldırım, G., Yıldırım, S. & Çelik, E. (2018). A new insight – 3D printers and their instructional use: A content analysis. Journal of Bayburt Education Faculty, 13(25), 163-184. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/498694
64. Yıldırım, K., & Keşan, C. (2022). Examination of student views on the use of 3D printers in the process of learning mathematics. The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, (53), 558-586. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1083725
65. Yılmaz, M., & Algil, M. (2018). Contribution to mathematics teaching materials production and education with 3D writers. Journal of Awareness, 3(4), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.26809/joa.2018445554
66. Zarotiadou, E., & Tsaparlis, G. (2000). Teaching lower-secondary chemistry with a Piagetian constructivist and an Ausbelian meaningful-receptive method: A longitudinal comparison. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1039/A9RP90005E