Virginia Tech® home

Our Process

In 2015, we decided to investigate how people were radically creating and maintaining equitable and welcoming makerspaces. Why? Because we were worried. While we saw the “makerspace movement” expanding, it wasn’t clear whether the democratizing mission was still in focus [1,2]. If the trend shifted from egalitarian to elitist, then what was the point? 

The design of these cards is based on an NSF-funded research project that involved visits and interviews with people participating in what we deemed as liberatory makerspaces. This meant that participants and their organizations were focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) values like: 

  1. Expanding what counts as making [3,4] 
  2. Fostering open, flexible, and welcoming environments 
  3. Including and valuing diverse cultural knowledge and practices [5,6] 
  4. Encouraging process as well as product, and 
  5. Expanding the outcomes of making to include agency, identity, and the after-life of maker projects. [7] 

Our research methods were focused on learning from actual people working in actual makerspaces. Supported by an NSF grant, we traveled to visit numerous makerspace partners. We recorded our visits and conversations (with their permission and approval from the Virginia Tech Institutional Review Board (IRB 16-433)).

(a) At Hacksburg makerspace in Blacksburg, VA, a magazine rack holds machinist and maker magazines. On the wall above the magazines, there are painted handprints, each with a signed name. (b) A sloped racetrack sits in front of lobby sign that says, "Sanger Community Science Workshop" and a tablecloth that reads "SAM Academy." On the table, there are stacks of newspapers and flyers, small American flags, a donation box, and a skeleton statue painted in the style of Dia de los Muertos. A skull painted in the same style and a painting of dark-skinned indigenous people in various settings hang on the wall over the table.  (c) A poster that says "Sanger SAM Academy — Community Music & Arts Studio" hangs above a table with toy cars wired with Raspberry pi circuit boards. (d) Three makers of various skin tones meet inside the Liberating Ourselves Locally (L.O.L.) makerspace in Oakland, CA (e) A banner hangs on bars in the exterior window of the L.O.L. makerspace. Along with icons of a spatula, pliers, whisk, and wrench, the banner reads: "L.O.L. Oakland Makerspace: a creative community space led by People of Color. Liberating Ourselves Locally. OaklandMakerSpace.com 1234 23rd Ave."
Community and communication are prioritized at (a) the Hacksburg makerspace in Blacksburg, VA; (b and c) the Sanger Community Science Workshop makerspaces in Sanger, CA; (d and e) the Liberating Ourselves Locally (L.O.L.) makerspace in Oakland, CA.

We then held an Unconference at the 2018 Nation of Makers conference [8] where representatives from each of our partner sites gathered with other maker leaders to discuss DEI efforts and challenges. All Unconference attendees agreed to participate in our study, so we were able to record and take notes on their discussions.

A collage of photographs from the Nation of Makers Conference, including (a) Adam Masters standing next to a poster titled, "Unconference on Making Liberatory Makerspaces. NSF". (b) 15 people, some standing and some sitting, in front of a wall covered in colored paper. They are collaboratively generating topics and a schedule for the Unconference; each piece of paper represents a scheduled discussion session. (c) An attendee's hand-drawn notes show a colorful concept map of discussion points. Text at the top of the page reads, "Adam Masters and Lisa McNair visited 7 sites of liberatory making. All here to share + learn. We are co-researchers." (d) Adam Masters, April Wilson, Jen Schacter, and Maria Town presenting on a stage with the words ‵Nation of Makers' projected behind them.
Highlights of our Unconference at the 2018 Nation of Makers Conference (NOMCON) in Santa Fe, NM: (a) Adam Masters standing next to a poster titled "Unconference on Making Liberatory Makerspaces. NSF." (b) Unconference attendees collaboratively generating the topics and schedule. c) An Unconference attendee's concept map sketch of discussion points. d) Adam Masters, April Wilson, Jen Schacter, and Maria Town delivering the keynote at NOMCON.

We then gathered a team of researchers to read and analyze transcriptions of our data for themes and ideas that would be good to share with others. We also checked back in with many of the participants as we started to create the action cards. The quotes that appear on the action cards come from this real data — we keep the actual wording where possible and sometimes paraphrase for clarity. 

A screenshot of a section of the researchers’ codebook showing
A large and diverse team of researchers reviewed the site visit data and created a codebook that resulted in the Action Card themes.

References

[1] Chachra, D. (2015). Why I am not a maker. The Atlantic, 23, 2015. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/01/why-i-am-not-a-maker/384767/

[2] Vossoughi, S., Hooper, P. K., & Escudé, M. (2016). Making through the lens of culture and power: Toward transformative visions for educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 86(2), 206-232. https://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/publications/7182804835761a089d5180.pdf

[3] Tan, E., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2018). Towards critical justice: Exploring intersectionality in community-based STEM-rich making with youth from non-dominant communities. Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(1), 48-61. http://invincibility.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/5.-Trying-to-Solve-Darkness.pdf

[4] Kafai, Y., Fields, D., & Searle, K. (2014). Electronic textiles as disruptive designs: Supporting and challenging maker activities in schools. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 532-556. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.46m7372370214783

[5] Calabrese Barton, A., & Tan, E. (2018). A longitudinal study of equity-oriented STEM-rich making among youth from historically marginalized communities. American educational research journal, 55(4), 761-800. https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/CalabreseBarton%20and%20Tan%20AERJ.pdf

[6] Barajas-López, Filiberto; Bang, Megan (2018). "Indigenous Making and Sharing: Claywork in an Indigenous STEAM Program". Equity & Excellence in Education. 51 (1): 7–20. https://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/publications/3946026495e84b9f5edde4.pdf

[7] Calabrese Barton, Angela (2018). STEM-rich maker learning: designing for equity with youth of color. Tan, Edna. New York, NY. ISBN 9780807759233. https://books.google.com/books?id=EHlqDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover

[8] Masters, A. S., McNair, L. D., & Riley, D. M. (2019, April). High Risk (With Hope For) High Reward: Lessons Learned from Planning and Hosting an Unconference. In 2019 CoNECD-The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity. https://peer.asee.org/31768