Preview

Informatics in school

Advanced search

A comparative analysis of Russian and foreign practices in teaching 3D modeling: Methodological approaches, software tools, and teacher training

https://doi.org/10.32517/2221-1993-2025-24-5-31-36

Abstract

In global educational practice, the study of 3D modeling is becoming an integral element in developing schoolchildren's information literacy and preparing them for future professional careers. International schools actively use 3D design technologies as a tool for developing students' spatial imagination and engineering thinking. The article presents a comparative analysis of international and Russian experiences in teaching 3D modeling in schools, identifying the relationship between school 3D modeling courses and corresponding courses at higher education institutions. Organizational approaches, projects, and teacher training in 3D modeling teaching methods in Russia, the United States, South Korea, China, and Singapore are examined.

Particular attention is given to the analysis of software tools used and system support for integrating 3D modeling into the educational process. The analysis results allow us to identify the most effective models for organizing learning and formulate recommendations for adapting successful global practices to the Russian school system, which boasts a number of advantages: high potential for developing engineering thinking within the subject "Technology", an extensive network of supplementary education institutions, and a wealth of local pedagogical practices that combine 3D modeling with drawing, mathematics, and informatics.

About the Authors

A. Yu. Fedosov
Russian State Social University
Russian Federation

Alexander Yu. Fedosov, Doctor of Sciences (Education), Docent, Professor at the Department of Information Technologies, Artificial Intelligence and Public and Social Technologies of the Digital Society, Faculty of Political and Social Technologies



T. A. Semenkova
Russian State Social University
Russian Federation

Tatyana A. Semenkova, a postgraduate student at the Department of Information Technologies, Artificial Intelligence and Public and Social Technologies of the Digital Society, Faculty of Political and Social Technologies



References

1. Роберт И. В. Цифровая трансформация образования: вызовы и возможности совершенствования // Информатизация образования и науки. 2020. № 3 (47). С. 3–16. EDN: SQWADW.

2. Сухнев М. А. Использование 3D-печати в дизайн-образовании // Санкт-Петербургский образовательный вестник. 2016. № 2 (2). С. 64–68.

3. Chen Jimin, Cheng, Lying. The Influence of 3D Printing on the Education of Primary and Secondary School Students // Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2021. Vol. 1976. Article 012072. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1976/1/012072.

4. Chien Y.-H., Liu C.-Y., Chan S.-C., Chang Y-S. Engineering design learning for high school and college first-year students in a STEM battlebot design project // International Journal of STEM Education. 2023. Vol. 10. Article 10. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-023-00403-0.

5. Davies S., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen P. Research on K-12 maker education in the early 2020s – a systematic literature review // International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2025. Vol. 35. P. 763–788. DOI: 10.1007/s10798-024-09921-6.

6. Ioannou A., Gravel B. E. Trends, contradictions, and the future of maker education research: A vision for 2025 disciplinary and transdisciplinary STEM+ learning through making spaces // Educational Technology Research and Development. 2024. Vol. 72. P. 1–14. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-023-10334-w.

7. Johnson L., Adams Becker S., Estrada V., Freeman A. The NMC Horizon Report: 2014 K–12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium, 2014. 50 p.

8. Kalolo J. F. Digital revolution and its impact on education systems in developing countries // Education and Information Technologies. 2019. Vol. 24. P. 345–358. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-018-9778-3.

9. Martin L. The promise of the Maker movement for education // Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research. 2015. Vol. 5 (1). P. 30–39. DOI: 10.7771/2157-9288.1099.

10. National Research Council. Successful K–12 STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011. 144 p.

11. Ng W. Design Your City: A STEAM project-based learning framework using 3D modelling // Journal of STEM Education Research. 2021. Vol. 4 (1). P. 15–30. DOI: 10.1007/s41979-021-00058-4.

12. Ren F. The construction and application of smart classrooms in China: A literature review based on 93 studies // Science Insights Education Frontiers. 2024. Vol. 23. No. 1. P. 3705–3724. DOI: 10.15354/sief.24.re385.

13. Sung J., Lee J. Y., Chun H. Y. Short-term effects of a classroom-based STEAM program using robotic kits on children in South Korea // International Journal of STEM Education. 2023. Vol. 10. Article 26. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-023-00417-8.

14. Tan C. Y. Enhancing design thinking through 3D modelling in Singapore’s education system // Asia-Pacific Journal of Education. 2018. Vol. 38 (2). P. 250–264. DOI: 10.1080/02188791.2018.1452393.

15. Xinyu Yu, Zezhong Yang. STEM education in China: A five years review report // Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies. 2022. Vol. 32. Is. 1. P. 1–11. DOI: 10.9734/ajess/2022/v32i130758.

16. Zeng W. An empirical study of China's policy on integrating ICT into basic education from 1988 to 2021 // Educational Technology Research and Development. 2022. Vol. 70. P. 1059–1082. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-022-10079-y.


Review

For citations:


Fedosov A.Yu., Semenkova T.A. A comparative analysis of Russian and foreign practices in teaching 3D modeling: Methodological approaches, software tools, and teacher training. Informatics in school. 2025;(5):31-36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32517/2221-1993-2025-24-5-31-36

Views: 113

JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2221-1993 (Print)