Project

STEAMina Module

Report by:

Aninakwah Vera Yeboah

June 12, 2025

Citation

Quansah, S., Asante, V., Yeboah, V. A., & Nsiah, N. A. A. (2023)

Culturally Responsive STEAM for K–12 Problem-Solving via Coding and Physical Computing

Abstract

Background

A learning module was implemented in Cape Coast, Ghana, engaging 68 children aged 7–15 from 34 communities in a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) education program.

Objective

The initiative aimed to equip learners with skills in coding, physical computing, and problem-solving while encouraging them to design local solutions aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Methods

Using a constructionist, culturally responsive approach, the program delivered 26 sessions combining virtual learning (Fridays) and in-person workshops (Saturdays). Learners engaged in hands-on projects involving computational thinking, coding, physical computing, IoT, and micro:bit programming.

Results

Surveys showed that 71.1% of participants reported increased confidence in developing innovative projects, demonstrating a shift from passive to active learning. Learners successfully applied STEAM concepts to real-world community challenges.

Conclusion

This hybrid, learner-centered model proved effective in fostering collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving skills. The program highlights the potential of equitable STEAM education to nurture socially conscious problem solvers.

1.0 Introduction

The learning module equipped learners aged 7–15 with the skills and mindset to tackle local challenges through the lens of STEAM, preparing them for active participation in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Grounded in 21st-century skills development (Trilling & Fadel, 2009), the program fostered problem-solving, collaboration, creativity, and technological fluency.

Aligned with the Micro:bit Do Your :bit Challenge, the track encouraged young innovators to contribute to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) using constructionist approaches (Papert, 1980; Kafai, 1995). Through hands-on exploration of coding, physical computing, and the Internet of Things (IoT), learners built real-world solutions to community issues such as waste management, water access, and clean energy, cultivating agency, innovation, and critical thinking.

The program followed a spiral curriculum model (Bruner, 1960), introducing computational thinking, electronics, IoT, and design thinking in scaffolded modules. Learners revisited and expanded on key concepts through increasingly complex projects, ensuring deep understanding and meaningful application.

This interdisciplinary, problem-based approach lies at the heart of STEAM education, empowering learners to become solution-driven thinkers in their communities.

2.0 Method

2.1 Participants

68 K–12 learners (50% male, 50% female) from 34 communities in Cape Coast participated in the program.

2.2 Mode of Delivery

To ensure accessibility in low-resource settings, the learning module used a hybrid learning model:

Video Tutorials:
Supported self-paced learning via flipped classroom strategies.
Virtual Live Sessions:
Enabled real-time collaboration.
In-Person Sessions:
Provided hands-on access to tools and peer learning.

Rooted in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles (CAST, 2018), this model offered multiple pathways to engagement, ensuring inclusivity for diverse learners.

3.0 Results

3.1 Learning Outcomes

Learners achieved the following outcomes aligned with Bloom’s Taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001):

Gained understanding of the Fourth Industrial Revolution’s impact on future work.
Build awareness of emerging technologies such as physical computing and IoT.
Applied computational thinking skills (Wing, 2006) to solve community problems using abstraction, decomposition, and algorithmic design.

Designed STEAM-based solutions for SDGs, such as the Plastic Musical Instruments and Energy-Efficient Streetlight projects.

3.2 Notable Projects

Learners applied their skills in notable, real-world projects:

Traffic Light System (SDG 11): Learners programmed micro:bit light sensors and LEDs to create a traffic light system that optimizes urban traffic flow. Using computational thinking, they coded algorithms to adjust signal timing based on real-time traffic, reducing congestion and fuel waste. This project applied engineering (circuit design), science (sensor mechanics), and mathematics (timing calculations), enhancing community mobility and urban sustainability.

Energy-Efficient Streetlight (SDG 11): Learners engineered smart streetlights using micro:bit sensors to detect ambient light and motion, minimizing energy waste. They integrated science (energy conservation principles), technology (coding automation), and engineering (circuit assembly), creating cost-effective lighting for safer, sustainable communities.

Plastic Musical Instruments (SDGs 6 & 13): Learners transformed plastic bottles into functional musical instruments, addressing waste management. They applied science (material properties), engineering (structural design), arts (creative aesthetics for community engagement), and technology (potential micro:bit sensors for sound effects). This reduced plastic pollution, indirectly supporting water access by protecting water sources (SDG 6) and promoting climate action (SDG 13).

Radio-Based Tracking Device (SDG 16): To combat child trafficking, Learners designed a radio-signal tracking device using micro:bits. They combined science (radio wave transmission), technology (coding signal logic), and engineering (device assembly) to create a portable safety tool, strengthening community security and trust.

Think Like a President Activity (SDG 17): Learners engaged in strategic planning to address a global goal for an assigned country, fostering collaborative goal-setting. Using systems thinking, mathematics (data prioritization), and arts (creative presentations), they developed proposals to enhance community partnerships, promoting collective action for local development.

3.3 Projects Code Repository

This repository contains code used by learners as part of hands-on explorations into emerging technologies such as AI, machine learning, physical computing, and coding. Learners used the BBC micro:bit, programmed with Microsoft MakeCode, and locally available materials to build prototypes addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including climate action, clean energy, and quality education.

4.0 Discussion

4.1 Problem-Solving and Innovation

Learners practiced design thinking (Brown, 2009) through iterative development: empathy, ideation, prototyping, and testing. This enabled them to holistically frame and address real-world community issues.
The creative learning spiral (Resnick, 2017), imagine, create, play, share, reflect, deepened their innovation capacity and made learning joyful and reflective.

4.2 Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Projects incorporated electronics, coding, arts, civic education, and data science. Leveraging connectivist learning theory (Siemens, 2005), these team-based projects mirrored real-world STEAM applications (Lave & Wenger, 1991), building technical and social skills. Example: The energy-efficient streetlight project required knowledge of sensor-based automation, circuit design, and visual design for community spaces.

4.3 Creativity and Critical Thinking

Using Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (1978), learners transitioned from guided learning to independent, self-directed projects. Tinkering with code and hardware increased motivation and fostered agency. The challenge to turn plastic waste into musical instruments embodied critical thinking, creativity, and civic engagement, supporting SDGs 6 and 13.

5.0 Learning Environment and Agency

To maximize impact, the program cultivated environments that nurtured agency and critical thinking:

Project-Based Learning (PBL): Real-world challenges, such as giving learners a task to transform plastic waste into functional musical instruments, fostered ownership, creativity, and systems thinking, while advancing goals related to sanitation and climate action (SDGs 6 & 13).
Makerspaces: Hands-on experience equipped with micro:bits, recycled materials, and simple electronics provided opportunities for experimentation, failure, and iteration, encouraging resilience and problem-solving.
Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Projects were intentionally linked to local issues like energy access, sanitation, and public safety, making learning more relevant, identity-affirming, and community-focused.
Hybrid Delivery: A blended model of virtual Fridays and in-person Saturdays increased access and engagement, especially in low-resource communities.
Mentorship: Facilitators and local experts supported learners as coaches and guides, helping them bridge theory and practice while navigating complex challenges.
Fail-Forward Culture: Iterative design cycles encouraged learners to test and improve their ideas, cultivating adaptability, perseverance, and self-confidence.

These environments aligned with constructionist and connectivist theories, enabling learners to transition from passive recipients to active creators.

6.0 Feedback and Reflections

Post-program surveys revealed that 71.1% of learners gained confidence in independently developing innovative projects. Facilitators observed a shift from passive learning to a more active, constructivist mindset. Learners were able to generate, test, and iterate ideas to address real-life community needs.

7.0 Challenges Faced

Two primary challenges affected the program’s implementation:

Component Access: Limited availability of critical tools (e.g., 3D printer or laser cutter for creating physical mounts or structural supports for the instruments) restricted project scope.

Financial Barriers: Some learners dropped out due to cost-related constraints, underscoring the need for equitable financial and material support in low-resource settings.

8.0 Conclusion

The learning module illustrates that STEAM education, when grounded in constructionist and culturally responsive pedagogy, can empower K–12 learners to creatively solve local problems. By integrating coding, physical computing, and design thinking, learners developed 21st-century skills and SDG-aligned solutions.

To scale such impact, it is essential to address infrastructure gaps and funding challenges to ensure all learners, regardless of context, can become innovators and change agents in their communities.

9.0 Learning Module Contributors

Sam Quansah – Principal Investigator & Curriculum Designer
Vera Yeboah Aninakwah – Lead Facilitator & Code Developer
Nana Adwoa Nsiah – Instructional Facilitator
Victor Ofori Asante – Instructional Facilitator

10.0 References

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39–43.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Creates New Alternatives for Business and Society. Harvard Business Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The Process of Education. Harvard University Press.
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org
Kafai, Y. (1995). Minds in Play: Computer Game Design as a Context for Children’s Learning. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books.
Resnick, M. (2017). Lifelong Kindergarten: Cultivating Creativity through Projects, Passion, Peers, and Play. MIT Press.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. Jossey-Bass.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.