Our instructors created tasks that asked us to reflect and think critically on various issues in Maker Space Education
The process is documented below in a series of Critical Learning Tasks (CLT's)
1) Critical Learning Task #1: Critical investigation into inquiry and design-based thinking
Task: With the number of Makerspaces increasing worldwide, it is important that we critically investigate maker mentality, create an understanding of the maker movement, and situate constructivism, inquiry-based thinking, and design-based thinking into the maker environment. For this all-encompassing presentation, we drew on our own experiences, theories, and pedagogies presented in the mandatory readings, supplementary readings, and other scholarly work. And used Genial.ly, Eduglogster, Articulate Rise, or Adobe Express, to design an interactive presentation.
Multimodal Submission:
Click on the following link to view CLT #1: The Maker Environment: a Course in Making
Written Submission:
Using Articulate Rise, I designed an interactive presentation that addresses the following questions: What is a Makerspace? What does it mean to have a maker mentality? Why are Makerspaces becoming more popular worldwide? How are constructivism, inquiry-based learning, and design-based thinking fundamental theories and pedagogies of Makerspaces? How are future-ready skills and competencies developed through making? How are Makerspaces being utilized to solve complex and critical problems?
2) Critical Learning Task #2: Foundations of Games and Learning
Task: Equity, diversity, and inclusion are essential components of building a space where individuals are recognized, honoured, and welcomed. Missing from Makerspaces is the cognizant infusion of EDIDA materials, challenges, resources, and opportunities. We created a written submission (a 3-2-1 critical analysis of two articles) as well as a multimodal version of the task, using the Plotagon app.
Multimodal Submission:
Click on the following link to view CLT #2: YouTube: The EDIDA Cognizant Maker
Written Submission:
Reading ONE: Kye, H. (2020). Who is welcome here? A culturally responsive content analysis of Makerspace websites. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 10(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1190
(3) Summary: Kye (2020) asserts that makerspaces, as well as the educators, staff and makers have a responsibility to create culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP). Aiming to quantify the extent of use of the five tenets of CRP, twelve online sites that provide public guidance for creating and facilitating makerspaces were analyzed (Kye, 2020). The analysis determined a low occurrence of the tenets of CRP and that guidance was not informed by existing literature in the aforementioned (Kye, 2020).
(1) Question: Does Kye’s bias that makerspaces inherently neglect culturally responsive pedagogy limit the scope of what is “out there” in 2022’; While there are always examples of poor inclusion and equity, would Kye’s research be more useful if it analyzed makerspaces that effectively followed the tenets of CRP?
Reading TWO: Melo, M. (2020). How do makerspaces communicate who belongs? Examining gender inclusion through the analysis of user journey maps in a makerspace. Journal of Learning Spaces, 9(1), 59-68.
(3) Summary: Melo (2020) asserts that makerspaces themselves as well as the educators, staff and makers have a responsibility to create gender inclusion spaces, where identity does not impact the creation process. Through observations and post-observation surveys of a 30-minute makerspace activity, Melo (2020) examined how gender identity impacts the maker process. The analysis of user journey mapping and user-reflection in the techcentric makerspaces indicated, (1) male users are more mobile in the makerspace compared to female users; (2) technologies are coded as being associated with men or women; (3) gender identity informs decisions during the collaborative making experience (Melo, 2020).
(1) Question: If all students were given a longer lesson on the different technologies within a specific makerspace and half a day to tinker with the technologies, would that increase willingness to try different technologies and change the observed journey maps and reported experiences?
Reading BRIDGE: Kye, H. (2020) & Melo, M. (2020)
(2) Bridge: While Kye (2020) examines online makerspaces and Melo (2020) examines a physical makerspace, both assert that the environments are not inclusive, that members are not treated with equity or given equal opportunity within the a makerspace. Both Kye (2020) and Melo (2020) conclude that improved access does not translate into improved equity and that more guidance needs to be in place and followed if there is genuine desire to create true equity and inclusion within makerspaces.
3) Critical Learning Task #3: Annotated Bibliography
Task: Select two articles and create two annotated bibliographies. Each bibliography cannot exceed 300 words. The annotations include a summary of key findings, research methods/approach, and a critical evaluation.
Written Submission:
Dousay, T.A. (2017). Defining and differentiating the makerspace. Educational Technology, 57(2), 69-74.
This article seeks to encourage PK-12 schools and universities to explore and employ implications of makerspaces and the blend of informal and formal learning that they offer. Using a qualitative approach, Dousay roots her argument in the intersectionality between constructivism, constructionism, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning (PBL) that comprise the essence of the maker. While these educational theories are encouraged in school environments, their intrinsic and hands-on informal nature have proven to be difficult for formal learning institutes to successfully adopt. The author notes that many educators have attempted to foster PBL curriculum but allowing students to take responsibility for their learning and effectively integrating technology tools poses challenges. She asserts that the makerspace approach provides a means for overcoming these challenges, making PBL easier to adopt while simultaneously bridging informal and formal learning. Yet, she is limited in sustenance by comparing only two concrete examples, the WyoMakers makerspace at the University of Wyoming and Jackson Hole High School, Wyoming; compared to the closed system of makerspaces in the PK-12 context (ex. JHHS), the makerspaces in a community (ex. WyoMakers) thrive due to their open system, fluid and evolving nature. This article supports Makerspaces as a valuable teaching strategy for creating authentic learning experience for students, while emphasizing that to attain sustainability, school-based makerspaces must continuously evaluate and evolve or risk becoming obsolete spaces.
Love, T.S., Roy, K.R., & Marino, M.T. (2020). Inclusive makerspaces, fab labs, and STEM labs. How can instructors make appropriate accommodations and modifications while maintaining a safer teaching and learning environment for ALL students and themselves? Technology and Engineering, 79(5), 23-36.
This article aims to exemplify the necessity of appropriate accommodations and modifications in makerspaces, fab labs and STEM labs to ensure that the safety of the user and learning environment is not compromised. The authors argue that regardless of abilities, all students can be inspired by this type of informal learning and excel in ways they may not in formal education classes. Using a qualitative approach, they suggest that sharing the resources highlighted in their article, regarding planning and active supervision in these spaces, can create open dialogue for implementation. As a strength, this article provides a framework of strategies to accommodate instruction for students with disabilities in these spaces, which ultimately involves meeting with the case manager, student, and parent(s)/guardian(s) to determine an appropriate strategy for protecting the safety of all and simultaneously providing equal learning opportunities. The article offers ways to proactively address common issues to limit the risk such as: monitoring security of the lab and tools; using Inclusive design in the physical space as well as learning activities; ensure there is appropriate supervision accessing students on case-by-case scenarios; provide scaffold instruction. While this article provides broad strategies for assisting individuals with disabilities, it is limited in contextual examples for readers seeking concrete support, providing a limited view on how to implement effective and safe inclusion in makerspaces and labs.
4) Critical Learning Task #7: Indigeneity and Inclusivity Through Making - (Mindmap and Critical Reflection)
Task: This task required us to imagine the potential of Makerspaces inspired by Indigenous worldviews and cultural practices that blend the past and the future and encourage knowledge transmission between elders and youth. In this space, the goal was to promote deep awareness of Indigenous culture and current problems through collaborative “making” projects. This space will inspire innovative ideas to solve current Indigenous issues.
Multimodal Submission:
Click on the following link to view CLT #7: YouTube: The EDIDA Cognizant Maker
Written Submission:
Inspiring innovative ideas to solve current Indigenous issues: The Interactive Mindmap Critical Review
Thank you for taking the time to view my CLT #7: A mindmap created on Genially that suggest ingenuity, through makerspaces that focus in Indigenous issues - particularly access to clean drinking water. I chose to use an interactive mindmap with the idea that anyone can view it and get a sense of it’s purpose without myself as the author having to be present to explain.
The hexagon layout was part of the intentional design for the map. In trying to embrace indegnous practices of connectedness and learning from nature, there is much to learn from the bee community and their famous honeycomb, a shape found in abundance throughout the natural world. Each cell of a honeycomb is a hexagon, held together with strength and efficiency - it maximizes usable area while minimizing materials required to create the shape - embodying sustainability much like the Indigenous relationships with the natural world. It relies on community, making, sharing and ultimately the interconnectedness that the proposed makerspace intends to embrace.
So with that, I will dive in a bit to explain how to navigate the mindmap and then invite you to explore it for yourself. As already noted, and hopefully depicted though the map, the indigenous issue I intended to focus on is clean drinking water for all communities - as a nation working towards decolonization, it is offensive to suggest healing can take place if basic physiological needs aren’t even being met. Makerspaces however, have the potential to bring together communities, working to create innovative ways to solve current issues and prevent future ones.
I would like to note that one aspect I kept getting caught up on, was not wanting to speak on behalf of Indigenous people, or to suggest that I have any of the right answers to create this makerspace. As such, this mindmap turned out to be a mix of important considerations combined with vague suggestions that would ultimately have to be collaborated upon within Indegenous communities, to ensure the process in general it about decolonization and creating Indigenous-led making opportunities.
Each hexagon on the map is interactive, you can engage with more material by simply hovering over the shapes.
the large hexagon is the overall goal of the makerspace
the medium hexagons are my proposed umbrella consideration for creating this makerspace
the smallest hexagons contain specific examples or provide links to useful resources
Okay, with that, I will leave you to it! Again, thank you for taking the time to interact and review my CLT!
5) Critical Learning Task #8: No Tech, Low Tech, High Tech Maker Spaces - Curation and Creation
Task: The purpose of this task was to act as a creator of rich, authentic, and practical resources found on social media that promote ideologies, planning, and the creation of an inclusive Makerspace from an EDIDA (equity, diversity, inclusion, decolonization, anti-racism) lens. You will show evidence of a systematic method for saving and organizing multimodal (i.e., websites, articles, videos, infographics, interactive posters, podcasts, etc.) online resources while critically responding in a clear and concise way to each resource inclusion. Please follow the prompts below in order to curate your resources and fulfill the expectations of this task.
Multimodal Submission:
Click on the following link to view CLT #8: Makerspace Curation Site
Written Submission:
Linked above is my Makerspace Curation Site. This CLT, allowed me to curate some of my favourite makerspace recources. It's a one-stop-spot to draw upon in future classes, particularly on days when I have forgotten how to tap into my inner-maker. The final bonus is that, this being a Padlet, means I have a living document that I can continue to make, iterate, and share on a continual basis. On the Padlet site, read the “Site Intention & Navigation” section before exploring!