The global rise of the Maker Movement and Maker spaces in K-12 education is fueled by technological advancements and open-source resources. Maker education, rooted in constructivism and "learning by doing," cultivates core 21st-century skills like critical thinking, communication, problem-solving, and collaboration. However, assessing Maker activities presents a significant challenge. Traditional assessment methods are inadequate for evaluating the higher-order skills involved in Maker education, hindering its progress. This research addresses this gap by developing a Maker literacy assessment model specifically tailored for primary school students in China. The study's purpose is twofold: first, to construct a Maker literacy assessment model encompassing key characteristics, abilities, and values for successful Maker activities; second, to determine the specific weights of indicators within this model. This model will provide theoretical and practical guidance for Maker education, enabling educators to evaluate teaching effectiveness, identify student gaps, guide teaching objectives, and facilitate content selection. The study acknowledges the global trend toward literacy-oriented education evaluation and emphasizes the need to innovate Maker literacy assessment practices within the context of China's educational landscape.

Existing literature on Maker education assessment reveals a range of approaches. Some studies focus on evaluating the process, understanding, and work involved in Maker activities. Others categorize learning outcomes into influence (emotional attitude), cognition (knowledge construction), and participation/collaboration. Previous frameworks often provide basic indicators, lacking the comprehensiveness needed to capture students' multi-dimensional performance. This study aims to bridge this gap by creating a more holistic framework encompassing practical abilities, collaborative work, design thinking, and emotional attitudes. The existing literature also highlights the importance of Maker education in fostering enthusiasm, creative thinking, and resourcefulness in primary school children. However, there's a recognized "Maker contribution research gap" regarding the precise contributions of Maker education to various domains, indicating a need for more nuanced investigations into its benefits and limitations. The study aims to fill this gap specifically within the Chinese context.

This study employed a two-phased approach (see Figure 1). Phase 1 involved a literature review and coding of approximately 200 published papers on Maker activities, design thinking, and innovation education from various databases (Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure). Content analysis was used to screen key indicators and construct a theoretical framework for Maker literacy assessment. This framework informed the development of a web-based Delphi questionnaire. Phase 2 utilized a two-round Delphi survey with 16 expert participants (Table 1) to refine the framework. The selection criteria for participants included experience in relevant fields (STEAM education, information technology, labor education, science education) and geographic location (within China). The first round involved evaluating the initial indicators and domains using a 5-point Likert scale. Feedback was summarized, and the framework was revised for the second round. The second round included pair-wise evaluations and importance ranking using judging matrices to determine the weights of the indicators. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was utilized with YAAHP 10 software to calculate precise weights. IBM SPSS 24.0 was used for additional quantitative analysis (median, IQR, coefficient of variation). Consensus was determined using criteria for interquartile range (IQR ≤ 1), coefficient of variation (CV ≤ 18%), and median ≥ 4. If consensus wasn't reached, the professional group debated and determined whether to retain or eliminate an indicator. The study also employed performance evaluation theory, focusing on assessing students' abilities in real or simulated situations, and evidence-centered design theory to ensure the assessment considers relevant evidence and generates interpretable data on knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

The initial framework identified four dimensions: design thinking, technology application, creation practice, and responsibility awareness (Table 3). Expert feedback led to revisions (Table 4), ultimately resulting in a refined model with three dimensions and twelve indicators (Table 5). The three dimensions are: Design Thinking, Technology Application and Materialized Practice, and Maker Spirit and Responsibility. Design thinking includes: Requirement definition, Creative idea, Scheme formulation, Prototype construction, and Iterative optimization. Technology Application and Materialized Practice includes: Technical understanding, Knowledge integration, Making, Information gathering, and Cooperation and communication. Maker Spirit and Responsibility includes: Maker spirit and Maker responsibility. The AHP analysis revealed weights for each dimension (Design Thinking: 0.365; Technology Application and Materialized Practice: 0.282; Maker Spirit and Responsibility: 0.348) and for each indicator (Table 6). Experts assigned the highest weight to "Design Thinking," emphasizing its importance in organizing and implementing Maker activities and its direct impact on learning outcomes. "Creative Idea" within Design Thinking received the highest weight among indicators, reflecting the centrality of innovation in Maker education. "Knowledge Integration" received the highest weight within "Technology Application and Materialized Practice", highlighting the importance of higher-order cognitive abilities. "Maker Spirit" received a higher weight than "Maker Responsibility" within the "Maker Spirit and Responsibility" dimension, emphasizing the importance of student enthusiasm and perseverance in Maker activities. The IQR values for all indicators were less than 1.8, indicating high concentration of expert opinions. Coefficients of variation (Cv) for all domains and indicators met the predefined criteria (Cv < 0.18).

The findings address the research gap by providing a comprehensive Maker literacy assessment model specifically designed for Chinese primary school students. The model considers the cultural context and educational policies within China. The three-dimensional framework captures the multifaceted nature of Maker literacy, encompassing design thinking, practical skills, and essential attitudes. The high weight assigned to "Design Thinking" underscores its foundational role in successful Maker activities. The weighting of indicators within each dimension offers valuable insights for educators to prioritize activities and focus on developing specific skills and attitudes. The model's alignment with existing Chinese education programs and its focus on higher-order thinking skills (innovation, problem-solving) make it relevant to current educational goals. The study supports previous research highlighting the importance of Maker education in fostering a range of skills and preparing students for future challenges.

This study successfully developed a Maker literacy assessment model for Chinese primary schools, filling a significant gap in the field. The three-dimensional framework (Design Thinking, Technology Application and Materialized Practice, Maker Spirit and Responsibility) with its twelve indicators provides a robust tool for educators, policymakers, and curriculum developers. Future research should focus on developing and validating an assessment instrument based on this model and conducting further studies to explore the model's applicability in diverse cultural contexts, particularly comparing it with international standards. Further research could explore the longitudinal impact of Maker education on student development.

The study acknowledges several limitations. The Delphi method, while valuable, does not guarantee a perfect conclusion; further validation and refinement are needed. The model's development was grounded in China's current Maker education curriculum, limiting direct comparability with other contexts. The use of the AHP, a subjective weighting method, may introduce bias. Finally, the geographical scope of the study limits generalizability. Future research should address these limitations by collecting data from diverse regions and countries.