Engineering design as a framework for developing pre-service teachers' TPACK in digital making environments

Ana Barbosa; Isabel Vale; Ana Barbosa; Isabel Vale

doi:10.3934/steme.2026034

STEM Education

2026, Volume 6, Issue 5: 848-884. doi: 10.3934/steme.2026034

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Engineering design as a framework for developing pre-service teachers' TPACK in digital making environments

Ana Barbosa ^{1,2
,
,},
Isabel Vale ^1,3

1.
Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, Rua Escola Industrial e Comercial Nun'Álvares, 34, 4900-347, Viana do Castelo, Portugal; anabarbosa@ese.ipvc.pt, isabel.vale@ese.ipvc.pt
2.
inED, Centro de Investigação e Inovação em Educação, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, Viana do Castelo, Portugal
3.
CIEC, Research Centre on Child Studies, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

Academic Editor: Xuesong Zhai

Received: 10 April 2026 Revised: 04 July 2026 Accepted: 08 July 2026 Published: 12 August 2026

The integration of digital making technologies and engineering design (ED) in teacher education has created new opportunities to support the professional knowledge required for teaching in technology-rich environments. Within this context, the TPACK framework provides a valuable lens for understanding how content, pedagogy, and technology are dynamically integrated in practice. However, less is known about how these domains of knowledge are enacted and interconnected throughout iterative design processes. This study explored how the ED process supports the development and integration of pre-service teachers' TPACK in digital making environments. A qualitative interpretative study was conducted with 12 pre-service teachers enrolled in a master's program in Mathematics and Science Education at a Portuguese higher education institution. Multiple data sources were collected, including classroom observations, participants' reflective journals, sketches, and digital and physical artifacts produced using Tinkercad and 3D printing. The findings indicate that the ED process used to design mathematical manipulatives created opportunities for participants to mobilize and progressively integrate content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge. Different levels of knowledge integration emerged across the steps of the design cycle, with iterative testing and redesign playing a key role in fostering reflective decision-making and professional learning. Overall, the study highlights the potential of ED and digital making as promising pedagogical frameworks for supporting integrated professional knowledge and fostering innovative practices in teacher education.
- STEAM education,
- engineering design,
- digital making,
- math manipulatives,
- TPACK,
- teacher education
Citation: Ana Barbosa, Isabel Vale. Engineering design as a framework for developing pre-service teachers' TPACK in digital making environments[J]. STEM Education, 2026, 6(5): 848-884. doi: 10.3934/steme.2026034

Related Papers:

Abstract

The integration of digital making technologies and engineering design (ED) in teacher education has created new opportunities to support the professional knowledge required for teaching in technology-rich environments. Within this context, the TPACK framework provides a valuable lens for understanding how content, pedagogy, and technology are dynamically integrated in practice. However, less is known about how these domains of knowledge are enacted and interconnected throughout iterative design processes. This study explored how the ED process supports the development and integration of pre-service teachers' TPACK in digital making environments. A qualitative interpretative study was conducted with 12 pre-service teachers enrolled in a master's program in Mathematics and Science Education at a Portuguese higher education institution. Multiple data sources were collected, including classroom observations, participants' reflective journals, sketches, and digital and physical artifacts produced using Tinkercad and 3D printing. The findings indicate that the ED process used to design mathematical manipulatives created opportunities for participants to mobilize and progressively integrate content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge. Different levels of knowledge integration emerged across the steps of the design cycle, with iterative testing and redesign playing a key role in fostering reflective decision-making and professional learning. Overall, the study highlights the potential of ED and digital making as promising pedagogical frameworks for supporting integrated professional knowledge and fostering innovative practices in teacher education.

References

[1]	Mishra, P. and Koehler, M. J., Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 2006,108(6): 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
[2]	Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. and Shin, T., Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 2009, 42(2): 123–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544 doi: 10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
[3]	Koehler, M. J. and Mishra, P., What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 2009, 9: 60–70. https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge/
[4]	European Comission, A STEM Education Strategic Plan: skills for competitiveness and innovation. 2025, Comission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels, Belgium.
[5]	National Science Foundation (NSF), STEM education for the future. 2020, Subcommitee of the Advisory Committee of the Education & Human Resources Directorate, Alexandria, USA.
[6]	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030, OECD Publishing, 2019.
[7]	English, L. D., STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 2016, 3(3): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1 doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1
[8]	Kelley, T. R. and Knowles, J. G., A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 2016, 3: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z doi: 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
[9]	Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A. and Ring-Whalen, E., Beyond the basics: a detailed conceptual framework of integrated STEM. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2021, 3(11): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00041-y doi: 10.1186/s43031-021-00041-y
[10]	Blikstein, P., Digital fabrication and 'making' in education: The democratization of invention, in FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors, J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching, Eds, 2013, 1–21. Transcript Publishers.
[11]	Ng, O. L. and Ye, H., Mathematics learning as embodied making: Primary students' investigation of 3D geometry with handheld 3D printing technology. Asia Pacific Education Review, 2022, 23(2): 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-022-09755-8 doi: 10.1007/s12564-022-09755-8
[12]	Tejera, M., Ortiz-Laso, Z., Ulbrich, E. and Lavicza, Z., 3D modelling and printing in mathematics education: Enhancing preservice teachers' knowledge through task design. In Proceedings of the 17th ERME Topic Conference MEDA4, 2024,452-453.
[13]	English, L. D., Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 2021, 8(1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x doi: 10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
[14]	Hester, K. and Cunningham, C., Engineering is Elementary: An Engineering and Technology Curriculum for Children. Proceedings of the ASSE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2007.
[15]	Vale, I., Barbosa, A., Peixoto, A., and Fernandes, F., Solving Problems through Engineering Design: an exploratory study with pre-service teachers. Education Sciences, 2022, 12(12): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120889 doi: 10.3390/educsci12120889
[16]	Barbosa, A. and Vale, I., Rebuilding manipulatives through digital making in teacher education. STEM Education, 2025, 5(4): 515–545. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2025025 doi: 10.3934/steme.2025025
[17]	Lin, K. Y., Wu, Y. T., Hsu, Y. S. and Williams, P. J., Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers' engineering design thinking. International Journal of STEM Education, 2021, 8(1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00258-9 doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00258-9
[18]	Barbosa, A., Vale, I. and Alvarenga, D., The use of Tinkercad and 3D printing in interdisciplinary STEAM education: A focus on engineering design. STEM Education, 2024, 4(3): 222–246. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2024014 doi: 10.3934/steme.2024014
[19]	Petko, D., Mishra, P. and Koehler, M., TPACK in context: An updated model. Computers and Education Open, 2025, 8: 100244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100244 doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100244
[20]	Schmid, M., Brianza, E. and Petko, D., Running in circles: A systematic review of reviews on technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 2024,214: 105024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105024 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105024
[21]	Shulman, L. S., Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 1986, 15(2): 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004 doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
[22]	Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H. and Phelps, G., Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 2009, 59(5): 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554 doi: 10.1177/0022487108324554
[23]	Shulman, L. S., Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 1987, 57(1): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 doi: 10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
[24]	Ma, L., Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States, 2nd ed., 2010, Routledge.
[25]	National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Principles to Actions - Ensuring Mathematical Success for All, 2014, NCTM.
[26]	Hidayat, M., Zainuddin, Z. and Mazlan, N., The relationship between technological pedagogical content knowledge and belief among preservice mathematics teachers. Acta Psychologica, 2024,249: 104432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104432 doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104432
[27]	Li, M., Vale, C., Tan, H. and Blannin, J., A systematic review of TPACK research in primary mathematics education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 2025, 37: 281–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00491-3 doi: 10.1007/s13394-024-00491-3
[28]	Gonscherowski, P. and Rott, B., A systematic review of the literature on TPACK instruments used with pre-service teachers from 2017 to 2023 focused on selecting digital resources. Journal of Computers in Education, 2025, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-025-00379-6 doi: 10.1007/s40692-025-00379-6
[29]	Celik, I., Kontkanen, S., Laru, J. and Dalyanci, A., Co-constructing adaptive lesson plans with GenAI: Pre-service teachers' Intelligent-TPACK and prompt engineering strategies. Computers & Education, 2026,241: 105485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105485 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105485
[30]	Reyes-Rojas, J., Díaz, B., Ruz-Reveco, C., Castro, A. and Reyes-González, D., Conceptualizing pre-service teachers' readiness for AI integration into teaching practices: An intelligent-TPACK approach. Computers and Education Open, 2026, 10: 100320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100320 doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100320
[31]	Simarro, C. and Couso, D., Engineering practices as a framework for STEM education: a proposal based on epistemic nuances. International Jourof STEM Education, 2021, 8: 53https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00310-2 doi: 10.1186/s40594-021-00310-2
[32]	Vasquez, J., Sneider, C. and Comer, M., STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, 2013, Heinemann.
[33]	Papert, S., Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas, 1980, Basic Books.
[34]	Khurma, O., Ali, N. and Khine, M., Exploring the impact of nal 3D printing integration on STEM attitudes in elementary schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023, 15(4): 458. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13568 doi: 10.30935/cedtech/13568
[35]	Läufer, T. and Ludwig, M., "Building" knowledge by creating manipulatives with the 3D printer: A course for mathematics student teachers. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'23), 2023, 19–23.
[36]	Huang, W. and Wang, T., Effectiveness of a three-dimensional-printing curriculum: Developing and evaluating an elementary school design-oriented model course. Computers & Education, 2022,187(1): 104553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104553 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104553
[37]	Tejera, M., Galiç, S. and Lavicza, Z., 3D Modelling and Printing in Teacher Education: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2025, 9: 1–32 https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-025-00147-2 doi: 10.1007/s41979-025-00147-2
[38]	Verner, I. and Merksamer, A., Digital design and 3D printing in technology teacher education. Procedia CIRP, 2015, 36: 182–186. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
[39]	Novak, J., 3D Printing in Education. 2022, Routledge.
[40]	Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K., Research methods in education, 8th ed., 2018, Routledge.
[41]	Creswell, J. W., Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th ed., 2014, Sage.
[42]	O'Connell, T. S. and Dyment, J. E., The case of reflective journals: Is the jury still out? Reflective Practice, 2011, 12(1): 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2011.541093 doi: 10.1080/14623943.2011.541093
[43]	Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M., Qualitative Data Analysis, 1994, Sage Publications.

Authors' biographies Dr. Ana Barbosa is a professor of Mathematics Education at the School of Education of Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo in Portugal. She has a PhD in Child Studies, in the area of Elementary Mathematics. She is a researcher at the Centre for Research & Innovation in Education (inED). Among other topics, her research interests focus on didactics of mathematics, problem solving, visualization, algebraic thinking, active learning, outdoor mathematics education, and STEAM education; Dr. Isabel Vale is a professor of Mathematics Education at the School of Education of Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo in Portugal. She has a PhD in Didactics of Mathematics. She is a researcher at the Research Centre on Child Studies (CIEC-UM). Among other topics, her research interests focus on didactics of mathematics, in particular, problem solving—patterns, creativity, visualization, connections in mathematics education, and teacher training. More recently, she is interested in the design of tasks and teaching strategies in diverse contexts that are more favorable to active learning of mathematics, such as STEAM education and learning outside the classroom

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2026 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)