reading papers on Makerspace research
Today, I continue to read more papers on Makespace.
1. Resources, facilitation, and partnerships: Three design considerations for youth makerspaces by _Breanne K. Litts (IDC_2015) : Case studies and findings from observing three youth makerspaces in US offering the design consideration with the lens of activity, facilitation and community. Findings are: Accessibility and visibility as availability of tools and resources are important; Facilitators’ backgrounds are important to the identity of making; And community partnership..
"While access to and making with 3D printers, laser cutters, and e-textiles builds new types of literacies and representation, these technologies should not be prerequisites for makerspaces.” p350
2. Making a Makerspace: Designing User Services to Serve Designing Users by Owen G. McGrath : Adopting the design thinking in designing a new informal makerspace in a higher education (Berkeley in this case). They developed three personas of a novice explorer, a course worker and a student club member and made a journey according to them. More about the service design rather than space design:
Regarding two different types of makerspace in university...
“1) A discipline-focused trend driven by new curricular emphasis on the design process coming from engineering and product design industry with an emphasis on formal design process. 2) A more informal and person-oriented trend growing out of the Maker movement, which embraces an extremely broad range of do-it-yourself activities spanning from craft to science having in common an aim toward personal creativity [8].”
Mentioning the previous approach not based on the design thinking...
“have been easy and comfortable to think simply in terms of filling a space with furniture and equipment—breaking the task into parts and assigning out different subtasks to different teams: space, equipment, software, training, etc. Here the makerspace might have been treated as merely an extension of the existing drop-in computing facility. An institutional perspective grounded in what has worked in the past makes it tempting, for instance, to view 3D printing as just another kind of printing. We know how to offer laser printing, so we fit 3D printing into that model. Among the potential pitfalls of this container-and-contents design approach is that the we-know-best outcome ends up not matching what users really want or need.”
3. Bots for Tots- Building Inclusive Makerspaces by Leveraging “Ways of Knowing” by Nathan Holbert (IDC 2016) : Feminist’s take on the maker education, mostly the insights gained from the toy making workshop for 9-10 year girls. Worth reading particularly for planning and designing the workshop. There are good data, statistics on the while male-dominated maker culture.
“As the “maker movement” continues to expand and enter formal education settings this mainstream method of engaging kids with STEM ideas is in danger of marginalizing girls and underrepresented communities, leaving them out of this exciting opportunity.”- p79
4. Making Community: The Wider Role of Makerspaces in Public Life (CHI 2016) : The roles of makerspace in local society, focusing on the community makerspace. According to this paper, its role includes:
serving the needs of the communities they are located in;
and reaching out to excluded groups.
The Makerspace Workbench: Tools, Technologies, and Techniques for Making
Inventing the Medium : Principles of Interaction Design As a Cultural Practice
School Library Makerspace (book)
Makerspace: Towards a New Civic Infrastructure : Comprehensive article on community makerspace.
