Paper Circuits vs. Breadboards: Materializing Learners’ Powerful Ideas Around Circuitry and Layout Design

Abstract

This exploratory study compares how young people (ages 15–16) learn circuitry concepts and layout design principles important to electrical engineering using one of two educational circuitry toolkits: paper circuits and traditional solderless breadboards. Paper-based prototyping kits are representative of a trend that incorporates new materials and approaches to integrating arts into traditional STEM disciplines. Extending prior research on how non-traditional toolkits enhance learning of electrical engineering outcomes, including basic circuitry concepts (i.e., current flow, polarity, and connections), this study examines the material affordances and design choices of the kits that contribute to youth’s understanding of more advanced circuitry layout design principles, including space allocation, placement of electronic components, and routing. Results indicate that paper circuits better afford the learning of layout design principles for printed circuit boards (PCBs) with large effect sizes. This study illuminates how the materials of educational toolkits uniquely solicit body- and material-syntonic patterns of activity, and thus differentially engage learners’ powerful ideas around circuitry and design principles. This investigation encourages careful consideration of the material affordances of some toolkits over others for learning purposes.

Trends, tensions, and futures of maker education research: a 2025 vision for STEM+ disciplinary and transdisciplinary spaces for learning through making

“…Yet, all too often, STEAM is a license to using the arts in service of STEM, which fails to realize the important mutual relationship between the arts and STEM that STEAM might aspire to achieve (Halverson, & Sawyer, 2022). Creative assemblies of these intersections advance efforts to reimagine the relationships between and among humans, materials, and the natural world (Barajas-López & Bang, 2018;Peppler et al, 2023). This cluster touches on STEM+ learning spaces, identifying disciplinary learning in making, as well as transdisciplinary environments where the practices of different domains meet and coexist (Sengupta et al, 2019).…”