E-textiles, STEAM education and school libraries: Perceptions of primary school teachers
How to cite: Guimeráns-Sánchez, P., & Alonso-Ferreiro, A. (2025). E-textiles, STEAM education and school libraries: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Revista Fuentes, 27(3), 301-313. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.202X.27721
Abstract
E-textiles are presented as an innovative educational resource that provides teachers with various opportunities to enrich the teaching and learning processes for a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics) education. This work seeks to explore the perceptions of Galician teachers immersed in the Creative Library program whose objective is to advance the innovative school library model around e-textiles as an educational resource for primary education, as well as its role in benefiting equity in the STEAM approach. An interpretive research with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach is proposed that collects the voices of teachers through an ad hoc questionnaire and interviews. The results reveal that teachers consider e-textiles an ideal educational resource to promote equality, inclusion and interest in STEAM disciplines. Furthermore, the Creative Library programme was the framework that introduced them to this educational resource, which they highlight as being of great importance for developing 21st century skills, using them in interdisciplinary proposals to introduce students to electrical circuits and programming from a creative perspective. The main barriers are the insufficient training in the field of e-textiles and the limitations of the rigid school grammar.
Keywords
Educational innovation; Education programs; Equal opportunities; Educational technology; Primary education; Primary school teacher; School library; Skills development
1. Introduction
Over the past decade, international education policies have promoted the STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics) approach, highlighting the importance of fostering early interest in these five areas and addressing them through a skills-based and interdisciplinary methodology. This pedagogical framework is rooted in maker education (Hughes & Kumpulainen, 2021), which advocates for “learning by making” as an active, hands-on, and experiential methodology (Giménez, 2024). As a result, many educational institutions have recently introduced dedicated learning spaces designed to promote 21st-century skills, commonly known as makerspaces (Rouse & Rouse, 2022)
One of the resources commonly utilized in such environments is electronic textiles, or e-textiles (Peppler, 2022) fabrics embedded with electronic and digital components. In line with the rise of the maker movement and the “Do It Yourself” (DIY) philosophy, e-textiles have become increasingly accessible and particularly valuable in STEAM education for their potential to integrate artistic and creative expression within the STEM disciplines (Peppler, 2016). This has led to the development of teaching strategies that explore the effective incorporation of the “A” in STEAM (Aguilera & Vílchez-González, 2024). E-textile activities provide a learning context centered on the creation of physical artefacts, in which learners take an active role in building and expressing themselves consistent with the constructivist principles of learning proposed by Papert (1980). Like educational robotics, e-textiles have been shown to encourage new ways for learners to engage with computing by integrating practices such as sewing and crafting with familiar, everyday materials like textiles and paper. This promotes broader participation in computing-related activities (Jayathirtha & Kafai, 2020). Additionally, e-textiles offer new ways of learning about circuits and electricity, providing a hands-on and engaging introduction to these abstract concepts (Peppler & Glosson, 2013). In support of this, a recent systematic review found that e-textiles promote equity within STEAM learning in primary education settings (Guimeráns-Sánchez et al., 2024)
In alignment with this trend, makerspaces have recently been introduced into school libraries (Kim et al., 2022), where the pedagogical value of e-textiles is increasingly recognized (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014). This transformation of the traditional school library is reflected in the IFLA/UNESCO Public Library Manifesto (2022), which highlights the critical role of libraries in developing media and information literacy, supporting both education and lifelong learning areas in which STEAM activities are playing an increasingly significant role (Juliani et al., 2021). In Spain, the current education legislation (LOMLOE, 2020) affirms that teaching staff, including those working in school libraries, should be specifically trained in cross-curricular science and technology education. This vision is being realized in the Autonomous Community of Galicia, where the Regional Ministry of Education, Science, Universities and Vocational Training, through its School Library Advisory Service and the LÍA Plan (Reading, Information, and Learning), has promoted the Creative Library Programme (BC, the Spanish acronym for programa Biblioteca Creativa) since the 2018–2019 academic year. Participating schools receive financial support to acquire materials, equipment, and STEAM-related training workshops for students, transforming libraries into creative learning hubs (Novoa & Pousa, 2024).
Considering that e-textiles as an educational resource a relatively new field of study (Guimeráns et al., 2024), that the literature highlights for a need for further research on the educational implications of the STEAM approach (Aguilera and Vilchez-González, 2024) and that different authors have demonstrated its relevance in continuing education (Sat and Cagiltay, 2024; Searle et al., 2016; Tofel-Grehl et al., 2021) and in the development of maker skills in initial and continuing teacher training (Valente and Blikstein, 2019), this study focuses on identifying, analyzing and interpreting the perceptions of teachers participating in e-textile training workshops regarding the educational value they attribute to this resource and its potential to promote equity in the STEAM approach. It also aims to investigate the impact of the workshops on teachers’ own teaching practice.
2. Methodology
2.1. Study Design
This research adopts an interpretive design with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach (van Manen, 2003), appropriate for expanding the understanding of the phenomenon based on the experiences of teachers who took part in the training workshops E-textiles and New Creative Technologies in the School Library, conducted within the framework of the BC between the 2019/2020 and 2023/2024 academic years. This methodology incorporates a range of techniques in its pursuit of the “study of the essential meaning of phenomena, as well as the significance and relevance they hold” (Ayala-Carabajo, 2008, p. 411). For this study, data collection involved a combination of an ad hoc online questionnaire and semi-structured interviews, aimed at exploring the pedagogical significance of integrating e-textiles into primary school education in the context of STEAM.
2.2. Participants
The study sample comprises teachers from 58 public schools in Galicia participating in the BC who attended the e-textiles workshop between the 2019/2020 and 2023/2024 academic years. One or two teachers from each center participated in these workshops, of whom 62 responded to the open questionnaire. The study sample consists of 53 female and 9 males most of whom were generalist primary teachers (59.7%), with the remainder being early childhood educators (22.6%) and subject specialists (17.7%). The average age of participants was 47.24 years, with 58% reporting more than 20 years of teaching experience. In terms of geographical distribution, the sample represents the four Galician provinces fairly evenly (A Coruña and Pontevedra: 25.8%; Lugo and Ourense: 24.2%). The majority, however, were teachers from rural schools (83.9%).
Three school library coordinators participated in the interviews, whose characteristics are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Description and characteristics of the interviewed teachers
| ID | Gender | Age | Province | Rural/ urban | Teaching experience | Specialty | Getting started with e-textiles |
| Int.1 | F | 48 | Pontevedra | rural | 18 years | Early Childhood education | 2020/2021 |
| Int.2 | F | 43 | A Coruña | rural | 21 years | Music education | 2020/2021 |
| Int.3 | M | 47 | Pontevedra | rural | 24 years | Music education | 2021/2022 |
2.3. Instruments and procedures
Two techniques were employed for data collection, both of which foster reflection on lived experiences through description and dialogue (van Manen, 2003): questionnaires and interviews.
An ad hoc online questionnaire was created using the Microsoft Forms platform. It consisted of 56 items 78736159Y+1104
divided into four sections: (1) sociodemographic data; (2) role in the school library and introduction to e-textiles; (3) e-textiles in relation to STEAM education and equity; and (4) teaching experience. The instrument was designed based on a systematic literature review on the use of e-textiles in primary education, which helped to identify key themes and served as a theoretical foundation (Guimeráns et al., 2024).
To ensure its validity, the questionnaire was reviewed by five experts in educational technology specializing in STEAM and school libraries, following established validation protocols (Taherdoost, 2016). Based on their feedback, the questionnaire was reorganized, and the wording of several items and response options was refined. The final version was sent via email on 4 June 2024 to the BC coordinators in each of the 58 centers that got involved, who shared it with other teachers who participated in support. The link remained active for three weeks. Participation was voluntary, and respondents were informed about authorship, data use, and the purpose of the study, with consent explicitly requested at the start of the form.
The interview was based on the research objectives. Its design was structured in four blocks: 1) personal-sociodemographic questions, 2) role of the creative library in the introduction to e-textiles, 3) interest and start in STEAM education, and 4) development of an Integrated Documentary Project (PDI, the Spanish acronym for Proyecto Documental Integrado) with e-textiles or electronics and programming as the main resource.
For its implementation, five people, coordinators of the Creative Library, were contacted by email, as they were considered key informants for including e-textiles in their PDI. Three of them agreed to be interviewed, which was conducted by videoconference. At the beginning of the conversation, the participant was informed of the purpose of the interview and its value for the research, as well as the data processing procedure that would be followed. After receiving informed consent, the interview began and an audio recording was made for retrieval and subsequent transcription.
2.4. Data analysis
Quantitative data from the questionnaire were organized in a spreadsheet and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 25). Descriptive univariate analyses (frequencies, means, and percentages) were conducted for the full sample.
The audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed for analysis. The qualitative data corpus, consisting of the transcripts and the spreadsheet generated by Forms, was imported into the qualitative analysis software ATLAS.ti v24.2.0 (2024) for analysis. The process carried out follows the content analysis method. Following the principles established by Strauss and Corbin (2002), the data were coded inductively and interpretively through open coding, selecting significant segments of information (quotes) for the proposed objectives, resulting in 16 categories of analysis (codes) organized into 4 dimensions (Table 2). Next, in the axial coding phase, relationships between the categories were established. These processes allow the central categories of the analysis to be identified, those with the greatest foundation (frequency-quotes) and density (number of relationships), favoring the generation of theory.
Table 2
Dimensions and categories derived from content analysis, codes, and their definitions.
| Dimensions | Category | Code | Definition |
| The potential of e-textiles | Educational value of the resource | VALRED | Excerpts mentioning the value of e-textiles for education |
| Introduction Programming and circuits | INPROG | References to the potential of e-textiles for learning about electrical circuits and programming | |
| Teamwork | TREQ | Comments on suitability for teamwork | |
| Student motivation | MOTALUM | Comments on student motivation in activities with e-textiles. | |
| Student emotions | EMOCALUM | References to emotional issues that arise in the use of e-textiles | |
| Equity | Access to STEAM | ACCSTEAM | References to the affordability and accessibility of STEAM education |
| Gender gap | GEN | Excerpts that refer to gender equality, female role models in STEAM, or stereotypes associated with e-textiles | |
| Inclusion | INCL | References to the participation of all people regardless of their conditions or abilities | |
| Challenges for teaching | Teacher professional development | DEPR | Excerpts referring to the teachers’ personal growth |
| Teacher training | FOPR | Excerpts that refer to gender equality, female role models in STEAM, or stereotypes associated with e-textiles | |
| Teacher job stability | ESPR | References to frequent changes in teaching staff each school year | |
| Teacher commitment | COMPR | References to the rejection of e-textiles by some members of the faculty | |
| School grammar | GRAMESC | Fragments on classroom management, grouping, time and space | |
| Material resources | RECMAT | References to the importance, necessity, or lack of material resources | |
| Institutional commitment | Creative LibraryProgramme | BC | References to the BC or to the library as a maker space at the educational center. |
| Investment Libraries | INVBIBL | References to the budgetary investment of the Galician School Library Advisory Service. |
3. Results
The results are presented in accordance with the dimensions of analysis that emerged from the qualitative data. Each section is organized around a central category, with the exception of the dimension Institutional Commitment, which emerged transversally and is discussed within the section on Challenges for Teaching. The findings combine qualitative data derived from content analysis with quantitative data drawn from the closed questions of the questionnaire.
3.1. Potential of E-textiles in Primary Education
In relation to the potential of e-textiles, teachers consistently emphasized the educational value of this resource (Figure 1).
Estos resultados, principalmente están ligados a la promoción de la creatividad: “A ver, a mí me parecen muy interesantes y sobre todo porque dan la oportunidad de trabajar la creatividad con los niños. Para que ellos desarrollen la creatividad, la imaginación y que hagan sus propios proyectos” (Entr.1); “La presencia de e-textiles abre innumerables puertas a la creatividad de l@s discentes, favoreciendo que cualquier niño o niña pueda desarrollarse en el ámbito de la ciencia y la tecnología, independientemente de sus posibilidades económicas, sociales y/o culturales” (Prof.11).
En varias ocasiones el profesorado relaciona este potencial creativo de los e-textiles con otras cuestiones como la motivación, las habilidades comunicativas o la respuesta divergente, considerándolos “una herramienta novedosa, motivante, que desarrolla la creatividad de las niñas/os, es un recurso más que efectivo dentro de la escuela” (Prof.35); y percibiendo que “las actividades que se proponen fomentan la comunicación espontánea y la creatividad, por lo que cualquier producto es distinto de otro, obteniendo, por lo tanto, un valor intrínseco” (Prof.13).
Además, se destacan otras potencialidades, como “el análisis, el diseño, la ejecución y la resolución de problemas” (Prof.38); la oportunidad que ofrece de manipulación, al ser un recurso tangible: “les gusta poder crear, manipular y programar por ellos mismos, que ellos vean que son los que crean” (Prof.42), y su contribución al desarrollo de la motricidad fina “reforzando en los niños y niñas la psicomotricidad fina a la hora de coser” (Prof.30), un aspectos que alguna de las participantes señala como un desafío en la práctica, señalando como un problema “la falta de motricidad fina a la hora de emplear aguja e hilo, ya que desde educación infantil no se cose” (Prof.48).
Esta visión general positiva del valor de los e-textiles se evidencia también en las respuestas al cuestionario sobre esta cuestión, como se muestra en la Figura 2.
These findings are closely linked to the promotion of creativity: “Well, I find them very interesting, especially because they give us the opportunity to work on creativity with the children, so that they can develop their creativity and imagination and carry out their own projects” (Int.1) ; “the presence of e-textiles opens countless doors to teachers’ creativity, enabling any child to develop within science and technology, regardless of their economic, social, or cultural background ” (Teacher 11).
Teachers often associated this creative potential with other aspects such as motivation, communication, and divergent thinking. E-textiles were described as “a novel, motivating tool that fosters children’s creativity and is a highly effective classroom resource” (Teacher 35); and “as activities that encourage spontaneous communication and creativity, so that each product is different from another, thus obtaining intrinsic value” (Teacher 13).
Other frequently cited benefits include ‘“analysis, design, execution, and problem-solving” (Teacher 38), as well as the tangible, hands-on nature of the materials: “they enjoy being able to create, manipulate, and programme by themselves, recognizing that they are the ones doing the making” (Teacher 42) and point out that “It reinforces fine motor skills in children when sewing” (Teacher 30). However, this was also mentioned as a practical challenge “there’s a lack of fine motor skills when using a needle and thread, as sewing is not taught in early childhood education” (Teacher 48).
This overall positive view is supported by the responses to the questionnaire (Figure 2).
Figure 2 illustrates a high level of agreement among participants that e-textiles are an effective tool for introducing basic concepts in electronics and programming (x̄ = 4.68). This view is further reflected in the content analysis: “e-textiles, due to their simplicity, provide a gateway into programming and electronics” (Teacher 12), “it is a first step towards understanding the infinite possibilities of electronics and programming” (Teacher 8), and it also allows for a tangible introduction, “it is a fun and very visual way to understand the mechanisms related to electronics and programming by exposing each part of the circuits and placing them in full view” (Teacher 39), “a fantastic way to understand circuits in a hands-on way and a very good experience for moving from analogue circuits to the introduction of programming boards” (Teacher 47).
Educators also expressed strong agreement regarding the wider benefits of using e-textiles in school libraries: boosting students’ self-esteem and confidence (x̄ = 4.65), increasing their motivation (x̄ = 4.73), sparking interest in scientific and technological subjects (x̄ = 4.63), and fostering teamwork (x̄ = 4.78).In this regard, teachers point out that “successfully completing a simple circuit gives them a positive self-image, improves their self-esteem, and motivates them to take on more complex projects” (Teacher 35),
“they are amazed by the results of their efforts, which enhances their self-confidence, collaboration, and idea-sharing” (Teacher 14), “they feel a strong sense of achievement upon completing the task. At times, they doubt themselves, but in the end, they succeed, which builds confidence” (Teacher 10) .Additionally, e-textiles were regarded as “highly motivating for students” (Teacher 19),“they are motivated to work with fabrics because they are a basic yet engaging material (Teacher 23) and the benefits of collaboration were also highlighted, “they learn from each other, discover new skills, and overcome frustrations” (Teacher 17).
3.2. Equity
Teachers stressed the role of e-textiles in addressing gender gap (Figure 3).“Combining a ‘traditionally female’ task such as sewing with a ‘traditionally male’ one such as building circuits brings both genders closer together and eases access to areas that might initially seem inaccessible, such as STEAM ” (Teacher 27).While some initially observed gender-based preferences “at first, the boys were only interested in programming, and the girls preferred sewing” (Teacher 8), teachers later recognized e-textiles as “a powerful and enjoyable tool for addressing gender disparities” (Teacher 1). Others noted that: “It’s not about gender; it’s about creativity and individual strengths” (Teacher 17), “gender becomes irrelevant” (Teacher 12).
The analysis shows that this category is linked to teamwork “male and female students work equally with each other. The male students do the cutting and sewing and then the female students do the programming, and vice versa” (Teacher 8) and to motivation “for our female students, meeting a female Galician role model like Paola was incredibly inspiring” (Teacher 45).
The value of e-textiles in promoting equality is also highlighted, both in terms of promoting access to STEAM education, as “ it uses a material that is very accessible to all students” (Teacher 12), and in terms of including all students in the activities regardless of their circumstances, as “it allows everyone at the school to be present, participate and learn” (Teacher 2).
The quantitative findings (Figure 4) further confirm the value that teachers attribute to e-textiles in promoting equity.
3.3. Challenges for Teaching
With regard to the dimension of Challenges for teaching, the central issue identified is teacher training, which was deemed “essential” (Teacher 7). This concern is prominent in participants’ responses (Figure 5): “We need training in order to be able to train”(Teacher 18), this is key because ‘once teachers see the possibilities, everything runs smoothly’ (Teacher 12). They emphasize that “ there should be more training for teachers because resources alone are not enough” (Teacher 32).
Teacher training was viewed as key to professional development, “training in e-textiles opened doors for me and helped me overcome my fear of an area I knew nothing about. Now, I feel more confident in the field of technology” (Teacher 11); “the more knowledge, the more confidence” (Teacher 7). “Let’s say I’m more daring. I jump in with the children and learn alongside them” (Int.1). Continuing education allows them to leave their fears behind. This fear, together with a lack of interest, were cited as the main reasons given for the lack of commitment among their colleagues in the field of e-textiles: “teachers often avoid programming and electronics due to fear or lack of knowledge” (Teacher 27), “I feel like, because I don’t master the subject, I’m not going to jump in and work on it with my students because I don’t fully understand it” (Int.1). To address the challenge of “involving teachers” (Teacher 25), “we need training and genuine interest”(Teacher 20).
Another significant challenge lies in the structural rigidity of educational institutions, particularly timetabling and the availability of suitable spaces. Specifically, they state that “the biggest challenge is finding time in the curriculum “(Teacher 33). The “issue of time is fundamental”, because integrating e-textiles involves designing “activities that require a different timing, which are learned through experience (Teacher 5). Teachers call for “adequate spaces to be able to carry out this type of task” (Teacher 35) and point to the challenge of integrating this resource when “many teachers are still tied to curricula and textbooks” (Teacher 14). They also stress the need to break away from traditional groupings and isolated subjects, proposing “mixed and rotating groupings” (Teacher 1) and providing “an interdisciplinary approach, which is why we have it in the library and it is available to everyone” (Int. 3).
They also point to the lack of material resources or their high economic value as another challenge they face in integrating e-textiles into educational practices. In this regard, there are major contradictions, both in the discourse and in the responses to the questionnaire (Figure 6), which show a disparity of opinions regarding the provision of resources available in the school libraries of their centers. In this regard, we find teachers who point out that “these materials are not difficult to obtain” (Teacher 23) and that “they are affordable and inexpensive” (Teacher 27), while others observe that “the biggest challenge is economic; the materials are expensive for the available budget” (Teacher 16).
Note: BC (Creative Library Programme). BE (School Library)
Figure 6 supports teachers’ claims, particularly regarding the importance of training in overcoming institutional rigidity (x̄ = 4.58). In this regard, teachers emphasize that ‘“teacher training is part of the key to the success of a programme” (Teacher 5).
The BC has served as the main platform for introducing e-textiles to 84% of participating teachers, primarily through workshops and training sessions held since its launch in 2018. Fifty-six per cent reported having implemented e-textile-based educational activities in both the school library and classroom.
“We connected local archaeological heritage with e-textiles in a project we called Petrotéxtiles. We began with nearby petroglyphs in Louro, which led us to an interdisciplinary project across all subject areas” (Int.2) (see Figure 7).
The quantitative data (Figure 8) reinforce the teachers’ views, positively assessing investment and teacher training, both in terms of promoting equity in STEAM education and in building confidence and introducing students to electronics and programming.
A final challenge, specific to rural schools, emerged during interviews, a lack of staff continuity. The constant change in teaching staff makes it difficult to maintain continuity in ongoing projects. “It’s something we have to revisit every few years. We have to start projects over again every few years due to frequent staff turnover” (Int.3)
“We struggle here in rural areas. For example, the girl who requested to teach English here has already asked to be transferred because she knows we’re working like this. That has saved us because, you see, the way things are and the fact that there are no permanent positions here, it’s a mess for me.” (Int.2)
4. Discussion and Conclusions
This study aims to explore teachers’ perceptions of the educational value of e-textiles, both in terms of their potential in STEAM education and their contribution to fostering equity.
With regard to the perception of e-textiles as an educational resource, the results indicate that the majority of participating teachers consider them a highly engaging tool that enhances students’ interest in STEAM subjects and fosters the development of key 21st-century competencies. Previous research supports these findings, highlighting e-textiles as a motivating resource (Jayathirtha & Kafai, 2020) that promotes interest in STEAM pathways (Rigden et al., 2019). Similarly, most teachers reported that e-textiles enable students to design interactive, tangible projects that facilitate an introduction to basic electronics and programming through artistic and creative expression (Peppler & Wohlwend, 2018). This aligns with the integration of the ‘A’ in STEAM (Aguilera & Vílchez-González, 2024) and contributes to the development of computational thinking (Fields et al., 2019). Participants also underlined the pedagogical value of new materials that support fine motor development and hand–eye coordination from an early age. These results are consistent with studies that advocate the use of conductive thread and similar materials to nurture such skills, while recognizing the essential role of teacher support in managing moments of difficulty or frustration (Hughes & Morrison, 2018).
In terms of equity, the results suggest that most teachers perceive e-textile projects as promoting collaborative work on equal terms. Fields and Kafai (2023) provide empirical evidence for the equitable potential of such activities within STEAM learning. Teachers in this study pointed to the inclusive nature of e-textiles, as they offer diverse modes of participation and engage pupils with varying interests and abilities, thus helping to break down traditional gender stereotypes. These results echo findings from Searle et al. (2019), who observed that such initiatives enable female students to identify with STEM fields, even if not directly with science subjects. The results show a positive impact on reducing the gender gap, as it allows for the integration of cultural issues and other disciplines. This interdisciplinary connection contributes to greater cognitive development, as well as emotional and behavioral benefits (Aguilera & Vilchez-González, 2024), which promotes access to technology for more diverse learners.
When analyzing the opportunities and challenges associated with teaching, the results show that most of the teachers who have implemented e-textile projects and activities appreciate their participation in the BC and recognize the educational potential of this resource. Many have continued to develop new proposals as a result. In this respect, García et al. (2019) argue that the perceived benefits of such projects for pupils can strengthen teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and belief in their practice, encouraging further pedagogical innovation.
In keeping with this, participants identified continuing professional development as one of their main concerns, acknowledging that the current educational paradigm demands changes in teaching and learning methodologies (Greca & Meneses, 2018). This challenge is compounded by the need to acquire new technological and pedagogical skills (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Herro et al., 2022). While the training sessions and workshops—and the resources made available—helped to foster teacher familiarity with e-textiles (Peppler, 2016), many respondents highlighted that rigid institutional structures and a lack of ongoing, subject-specific training hinder the effective integration of such resource. Research on the implementation of resources for STEAM education points to time constraints as a major barrier (Rich et al., 2019), both for classroom application and for adequate teacher training (Herro & Quigley, 2016). Moreover, insufficient expertise and the need for appropriate pedagogical strategies remain key challenges (Rich et al., 2019). Srikoom and Faikhamta (2018) emphasize that access to resources and workshops alone is not sufficient—high-quality, specialized training is essential.
The main limitations of this study focus on the representativeness of the quantitative data, especially the sample size and the restriction of the territory covered, which is limited to a single Autonomous Community (Galicia). Future research, in addition to evaluating a large sample study, it should consider broader geographical contexts where the school library is similarly being reimagined as a creative learning space and analyze the perspectives of other teachers and other voices regarding this educational resource.
In conclusion, the present analysis highlights the significant educational potential of e-textiles, which are perceived as a tangible and manipulative educational resource, close to everyday life, practical, and creative. It also reveals the relevance of this resource for sparking students’ interest and curiosity in programming and electronics from an equitable approach, which raises the need to incorporate it into teaching and learning processes as a key resource for STEAM education. Finally, the study emphasizes the need for teacher training, beyond simply providing equipment. High-quality ongoing training, such as that offered by the BC, should include the necessary support to build confidence and trust among education professionals in the use of innovative resources that help prepare students for the challenges of the 21st century.
Authors’ contribution
Paola Guimeráns Sánchez: Conceptualisation; Methodology; Data collection and management; Manuscript writing (review and editing). Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro: Methodology; Data analysis; Manuscript writing (review and editing).
References
Aguilera, D., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2024). ¿De qué hablamos cuando hablamos de educación STEAM? Una revisión de experiencias educativas. Revista Fuentes, 26(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.12795/revistafuentes.2024.15412
ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH. (2024). ATLAS.ti Mac (versión 24.2.0) [Software de análisis de datos cualitativos].https://atlasti.com/
Ayala-Carabajo, A. (2008). La metodología fenomenológico-hermenéutica de M. Van Manen en el campo de la investigación educativa. Posibilidades y primeras experiencias. Revista de investigación educativa, 26(2), 409-430,
Castro-Rodríguez, E., & Belén Montoro, A. (2021). Educación STEM y formación del profesorado de Primaria en España. Revista De Educación, (393), 353-378. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2021-393-497
Fields, D. A., Lui, D. y Kafai, Y. B. (2019). Teaching computational thinking with electronic textiles: Modeling iterative practices and supporting personal projects in exploring computer science. Computational Thinking Education, 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_16
Fields, D., & Kafai, Y. (2023). Supporting and sustaining equitable STEAM activities in high school classrooms: Understanding Computer Science Teachers’ Needs and practices when implementing an E-Textiles curriculum to forge connections across communities. Sustainability, 15(11), 8468 https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118468
García, F. J., Quesada, A., Romero-Ariza, M. R., & Abril, A. (2019). Promoting inquiry in mathematics and science: professional development of primary and secondary school teachers. Educación XX1, 22(2), 335–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100413
Giménez, S. (2024). Educación maker: Creando un aprendizaje activo y significativo. Editorial Autores de Argentina.
Guimeráns-Sánchez, P., Alonso-Ferreiro, A., Zabalza-Cerdeiriña, M.-A., & Monreal-Guerrero, I. M. (2024). E-textiles para la educación STEAM en educación primaria: una revisión sistemática. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 27(1), 417–448. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.27.1.37645
Greca, I. M., & Meneses Villagrá, J. Á. (2018). Proyectos STEAM para la Educación Primaria: fundamentos y aplicaciones prácticas. Dextra.
Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard educational review, 84(4), 495-504. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.34j1g68140382063
Herro, D., Quigley, C., Plank, H., Abimbade, O., & Owens, A. (2022). Instructional practices promoting computational thinking in STEAM elementary classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 38(4), 158-172. https://doi.org/10.3102/ip.22.1880539
Herro,D., & Quigley, C. (2016). STEAM enacted: A case study of a middle school teacher implementing STEAM instructional practices. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 35(4), 319-342.
Hughes, J. M., & Kumpulainen, K. (2023). Editorial: Maker education: opportunities and challenges, volume II. Frontiers in Education (8). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1285339
Hughes, J., & Morrison, L. (2018). The use of E-textiles in Ontario education. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation, 41(1).
Jayathirtha,G., & Kafai,Y. B. (2020). Interactive stitch sampler: A synthesis of a decade of research on using electronic textiles to answer the who, where, how, and what for K-12 computer science education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 20(4), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1145/341829
Juliani, J. P., & da Cunha Prates, G. V. (2021). Bibliotecas escolares do século XXI: implementando makerspaces. Biblioteca Escolar em Revista, 7(2), 42-60. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2238-5894.berev.2021.181387
Kim, S. H., Jung, Y. J., & Choi, G. W. (2022). A systematic review of library makerspaces research. Library & Information Science Research, 44(4), 101202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101202
Ley Orgánica 3/2020, de 29 de diciembre (LOMLOE), por la que se modifica la Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 340, del 30 de diciembre de 2020. Recuperado: https://bit.ly/3Qm0Syz
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. J. (2006). El conocimiento del contenido pedagógico tecnológico: un nuevo marco para el conocimiento docente. Registro del Colegio de Maestros, 108(6), 1017- 1054.
Novoa, C., & Pousa, M. (2024). La biblioteca escolar, milagro u oportunidad? Dosier Graó, (9), 33-37.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books
Peppler, K. (2016). A review of e-textiles in education and society. Handbook of research on the societal impact of digital media, 268-290.
Peppler, K. (2022). Makerspaces: Supporting creativity and innovation by design. In Creativity and Innovation (pp. 265-274). Routledge.
Peppler, K., & Wohlwend, K. (2018). Theorizing the nexus of STEAM practice. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 88-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1316331
Peppler, K., & Glosson, D. (2013). Stitching circuits: Learning about circuitry through e-textile materials. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 751-763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9428-2
Rich, K.M., Yadav, A., & Schwarz, C.V. (2019). Computational thinking, mathematics, and science: Elementary teachers’ perspectives on integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 27(2), 165-205.
Rigden, K., Jawaharlal, M. & Gutzke, N. (2019). Femineer® Program: A Model for Engaging K-12 Girls in STEM. En 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2–32837
Rodríguez, J.G. & Garzón, J.C. (2003). Cooperación escuela-Universidad y construcción de currículo, en Leite, R. y Flavio, A. Currículo na contemporaneidade. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/4i1O8sJ
Rouse, R., & Rouse, A. G. (2022). Taking the maker movement to school: A systematic review of preK-12 school-based makerspace research. Educational Research Review, 35, 100413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100413
Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology; How to choose a sampling technique for research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 5(2), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035
Tofel-Grehl, C., Searle, K. A., Hawkman, A., L MacDonald, B., & Suárez, M. I. (2021). Rural Teachers’ Cultural and Epistemic Shifts in STEM Teaching and Learning. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 11(2), 45. https://doi.org/10.3776/tpre.2021.v11n2p45-66
Sat, M., & Cagiltay, K. (2024). Empowering teachers’ professional development with e-textiles supported educational STEAM projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09892-8
Searle, K., Tofel-Grehl, C., & Breitenstein, J. (2019). Equitable engagement in STEM: Using e-textiles to challenge the positioning of non-dominant girls in school science. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 21(1), 42-61.https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v21i1.1778
Searle, K. A., Tofel-Grehl, C., & Allan, V. (2016, October). The e-textiles bracelet hack: Bringing making to middle school classrooms. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference on Creativity and Fabrication in Education (pp. 107-110). https://doi.org/10.1145/3003397.300341
Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and information technologies, 22, 469-495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0
Srikoom, W., Faikhamta, C., & Hanuscin, D. (2018). Dimensions of effective STEM integrated teaching practice. K-12 stem Education, 4(2), 313-330.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2002). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Editorial Universidad de Antioquia.
UNESCO, I. (2022). Manifiesto de la Biblioteca Pública IFLA-UNESCO.
Valente, J. A. & Blikstein, P. (2019). Maker education: Where is the knowledge construction? Constructivist Foundations, 14(3), 252-262. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/4b7fU4N
Van Manen, M. (2003). Investigación educativa y experiencia vivida. Ciencia humana para una pedagogía de la acción y de la sensibilidad. Idea Books.