THE MA-KE MODEL: A SOCIAL STUDIES MAKERSPACE INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL TO ENHANCE PRE-SERVICE SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHERS’ COMPETENCIES IN THE NEXT NORMAL CLASSROOM

Main Article Content

Chayanid Yimsawat
Jaturon Auppatham
Uthaiwan Pinwattanakul

Abstract

The preparation of pre-service social studies teachers within next-normal classroom contexts lacks an operational framework that systematically integrates knowledge construction, critical thinking, socio-cultural participation, and teacher competency development, especially in the context of makerspaces, where most research is still limited to STEM fields.This study aimed to 1) Design the MA-KE Model as a Social Studies Makerspace instructional model for pre-service social studies teachers and 2) Examine the competencies developed through its implementation. A qualitative research and development design was employed within a participatory action research (PAR) framework, involving iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection. The model was developed by integrating educational theories with the socio-cultural context of Lanna communities in Northern Thailand. Participants comprised 64 pre-service social studies teachers from Chiang Mai University and 40 secondary school students from two schools, purposively selected to reflect the contextual differences between digital and cultural capital: a private school in an urban area and an ethnic minority boarding school. Data were collected using multiple methods (structured observation records; focus group discussions; open ended questionnaires; reflective journals; student produced artefacts) and data analysis was conducted via an iterative qualitative methodology. The results showed that the MA-KE Model consists of four consecutive phases: Mapping Learners, Architecting the Learning Journey, Kicking-off Creative Learning Practice, and Evaluating and Elevating Learners. In addition, the use of the model enabled the pre-service teachers to develop six competencies that functioned as an interconnected ecosystem, i.e., each of the competencies supported and complemented the other five. The study advances three theoretical contributions: A culturally grounded makerspace pedagogy framework, A reflective practice framework for transformative learning, The MA-KE Competency Ecosystem. These contributions support educational innovation aligned with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4.7 and 10.

Article Details

How to Cite
Yimsawat, C., Auppatham, J., & Pinwattanakul, U. (2026). THE MA-KE MODEL: A SOCIAL STUDIES MAKERSPACE INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL TO ENHANCE PRE-SERVICE SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHERS’ COMPETENCIES IN THE NEXT NORMAL CLASSROOM. Journal of Social Science and Cultural, 10(10), 60–78. retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JSC/article/view/297399
Section
Research Articles

References

กองทุนเพื่อความเสมอภาคทางการศึกษา (กสศ.). (2566). Internet Lost Education Error! เรียกใช้เมื่อ 21 กรกฎาคม 2569 จาก https://www.eef.or.th/article-190423/

ข้อบังคับคุรุสภาว่าด้วยมาตรฐานวิชาชีพ (ฉบับที่ 4) พ.ศ. 2562. (2563). ราชกิจจานุเบกษา เล่ม 136 ตอนพิเศษ 68 ง หน้า 18-20 (20 มีนาคม 2563).

สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย (TDRI). (2560). พัฒนาครูไทย เริ่มตั้งแต่ปรับหลักสูตรถึงกระบวนการพัฒนาต่อเนื่อง. เรียกใช้เมื่อ 21 กรกฎาคม 2569 จาก https://tdri.or.th/2017/06/education-teacher-reform/

อานุภาพ เลขะกุล. (2564). ความปกติถัดไปอุดมศึกษา: ความท้าทาย. วารสารการศึกษาและนวัตกรรมการเรียนรู้, 1(2), 111-125.

Andrews, M. E. et al. (2021). Self-efficacy and belonging: the impact of a university makerspace. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1-18.

Apple, M. W. (2013). Can Education Change Society? Abingdon: Routledge.

Arifin, Z. et al. (2025). The effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills in science education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(3), 1-24.

Banks, J. A. & McGee, C. A. (1989). Multicultural Education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Beetham, H. & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: designing for 21st century learning. New York: Routledge.

Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Culala, H. J. D. (2022). The “New Normal” in Education and the Future of Schooling. KnE Social Sciences, 1(2022), 40-47.

Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum Books.

Halverson, E. R. & Sheridan, K. M. (2014). The Maker Movement in Education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495-504.

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.

Khaewphuang, P. & Nuangchalerm, P. (2025). Components and Indicators of Instructional Design Competence for Thai Pre-Service Teachers. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 6(2), 14-22.

Kyambade, M. et al. (2025). Exploring the evolution of artificial intelligence in education: from AI-guided learning to learner-personalized paradigms. Cogent Education, 12(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2505297.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Moll, L. et al. (1992). Funds of Knowledge for Teaching: Using a Qualitative Approach to Connect Home and Classrooms. Qualitative Issues in Educational Research, 31(2), 132-141.

National Council for the Social Studies. (2013). The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History. Silver Spring: National Council for the Social Studies.

Papert, S. & Harel, I. (1990). Situating Constructionism. Cambridge: MIT Media Laboratory.

Pardede, P. (2024). The Strands and Findings of Recent Research on Technology-enhanced Collaborative Writing in EFL Settings: A Systematic Review. Journal of English Teaching, 10(2), 170-182.

Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15(1), 1-12.

Quintana-Ordorika, A. et al. (2024). The Impact of Using Collaborative Online International Learning during the Design of Maker Educational Practices by Pre-Service Teachers. Sustainability, 16(3), 1-13.

Schön, D. A. (1983). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Towards a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.

Tseng, H. & Inman, C. (2024). New Normal in higher education for the post-COVID-19 world: Reimagining and reexamining factors for student success in online learning. Online Learning, 29(2), 213-240.

Vongkulluksn, V. W. et al. (2018). The role of value on teachers’ internalization of external barriers and externalization of personal beliefs for classroom technology integration. Computers and Education, 118, 70-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.009.

Vossoughi, S. et al. (2016). Making Through the Lens of Culture and Power: Toward Transformative Visions for Educational Equity. Harvard Educational Review, 86(2), 206-232.

Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past (Critical Perspectives on The Past). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.