Search for: All records

Prior research emphasizes the benefits of university makerspaces, but overall, quantitative metrics to measure how a makerspace is doing have not been available. Drawing on an analogy to metrics used for the health of industrial ecosystems, this article evaluates changes during and after COVID-19 for two makerspaces. The COVID-19 pandemic disturbed normal life worldwide and campuses were closed. When students returned, campus life looked different, and COVID-19-related restrictions changed frequently. This study uses online surveys distributed to two university makerspaces with different restrictions. Building from the analysis of industrial ecosystems, the data were used to create bipartite network models with students and tools as the two interacting actor groups. Modularity, nestedness, and connectance metrics, which are frequently used in ecology for mutualistic ecosystems, quantified the changing usage patterns. This unique approach provides quantitative benchmarks to measure and compare makerspaces. The two makerspaces were found to have responded very differently to the disruption, though both saw a decline in overall usage and impact on students and the space’s health and had different recoveries. Network analysis is shown to be a valuable method to evaluate the functionality of makerspaces and identify if and how much they change, potentially serving as indicators of unseen issues. 

Analyzing interactions between actors from a systems perspective yields valuable information about the overall system's form and function. When this is coupled with ecological modeling and analysis techniques, biological inspiration can also be applied to these systems. The diagnostic value of three metrics frequently used to study mutualistic biological ecosystems (nestedness, modularity, and connectance) is shown here using academic engineering makerspaces. Engineering students get hands‐on usage experience with tools for personal, class, and competition‐based projects in these spaces. COVID‐19 provides a unique study of university makerspaces, enabling the analysis of makerspace health through the known disturbance and resultant regulatory changes (implementation and return to normal operations). Nestedness, modularity, and connectance are shown to provide information on space functioning in a way that enables them to serve as heuristic diagnostics tools for system conditions. The makerspaces at two large R1 universities are analyzed across multiple semesters by modeling them as bipartite student‐tool interaction networks. The results visualize the predictive ability of these metrics, finding that the makerspaces tended to be structurally nested in any one semester, however when compared to a “normal” semester the restrictions are reflected via a higher modularity. The makerspace network case studies provide insight into the use and value of quantitative ecosystem structure and function indicators for monitoring similar human‐engineered interaction networks that are normally only tracked qualitatively. 

The growing popularity of progressive education pedagogies combined with the continued rise of the maker movement has propelled knowledge and interest in makerspaces across education. As a result, makerspaces have become a common sight on college campuses around the world. These spaces offer students a unique opportunity to apply the hard and soft skills learned in the classroom to projects with real consequences. Students learn to take ownership of their work and experiment and iterate until they are proud of their results. Through this process they grow in design self-efficacy, innovation, and collaboration skills. Makerspaces are a powerful tool in the hands of university professors, but not all students benefit from them equally. Many students still face real or perceived barriers to entry caused in part by a lack of comfort and confidence in the space. This study seeks to examine students’ sense of belonging at a university makerspace and determine how gender, major, study locations, and classes affect this sense. Online surveys were distributed to students who used the makerspace in Fall 2022 and Spring 2023. Students answered a series of Likert style questions about how they feel in the space and statistical tests were used to determine correlation and significance of the results. It was found that sense of belonging in the space overall was high, but that females, non-mechanical engineering majors, and students who did not study in the space reported statistically lower sense of comfort. Suggestions are given to makerspace administrators of how to address and avoid these gaps in belonging and make the space more inclusive and welcoming to all students.