Search for: All records

Makerspaces, workspaces where families can explore materials and tools collaboratively, can provide an opportunity for creative expression and early engineering learning in community spaces. The present study examined a cardboard-focused museum makerspace that included an assembly-style activity. Assembly-style making uses instructions to support makers. Such activities have been critiqued as limiting creativity and engineering thinking. However, makers who are less comfortable in makerspaces may benefit from assembly-style activities helping to scaffold their entry into the space. We explored these criticisms and potential benefits of assembly-style making through developing case studies of video data taken by families in a makerspace. Visitors made creative and personally meaningful creations when engaged in assembly style making. Moreover, assembly-style making mediated a family less comfortable with making to get started in the space alongside ample evidence of families following engineering design processes. Contrary to popular belief, assembly-style making offers an important support to novice makers, without eliminating creativity and engineering design processes, and should be considered in the mix of activities available in makerspaces to support makers of all levels of comfort in making. 

Abstract The museum field currently and historically has centered on the needs of White, educated, privileged, and affluent people, and changing that reality requires new ways of conceptualizing, organizing, and assessing our core practices. Practice‐based models—including specific stories of how museums and communities work together—are still needed in our field, both as guidance for structuring future projects and as inspiration for what is possible. We share a case study of a 10‐year makerspace design process and identify key features for sustaining community–museum relationships over an extended period of work, which we call community‐informed design. We describe five key aspects that promote sustainability in terms of community–museum relationships and the creation of high‐quality experiences: naming values and assumptions, emergent planning, flexible and distributed staffing, organization‐to‐organization relationships, and layered data. 

Abstract BackgroundIn this paper, we add to the scant literature base on learning from failures with a particular focus on understanding educators' shifting mindset in making‐centred learning environments. AimsThe aim of Study 1 was to explore educators' beliefs about failure for learning and instructional practices within their local making‐centred learning environments. The aim of Study 2 was to examine how participation in a video‐based professional development cycle regarding failure moments in making‐centred learning environments might have shifted museum educators' failure pedagogical mindsets. SampleIn Study 1, the sample included 15 educators at either a middle school or museum. In Study 2, the sample included 39 educators across six museums. MethodsIn Study 1, educators engaged in a semi‐structured interview that lasted between 45 and 75 min. In Study 2, the six museums video recorded professional development sessions. ResultsResults from Study 1 highlighted educators' failure pedagogical mindsets as either underdeveloped or rigid and absent of relational thinking between self‐ and youth‐failures. One key result from Study 2 was a shift from an abstract sense of failure as youth‐focused to a practical sense of failure as educator‐focused and/or relational (i.e., youth educator‐focused failure moments). ConclusionsBased on the results from Study 1 and Study 2, our research suggests that exploring an educator's relationship with failure is important and witnessing and reflecting upon their own failure pedagogical mindset in action may facilitate a shift towards a more complex and interconnected space for growth and development of both educators and youth.