An Empirically Informed Taxonomy for the Maker Movement

Voigt, Christian; Montero, Calkin Suero; Menichinelli, Massimo

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45982-0_17

Cited by 18 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Enabled by the growing accessibility of affordable manufacturing technology, this is manifested in the expansion of the so-called "maker culture" which takes action to install participative production as an alternative to industrial production (Hatch 2013;Voigt, Montero, and Menichinelli 2016). The emergence of this culture is interwoven with the phenomenon of open source hardware (OSH), which transfers open source principles (as defined by Open Source Initiative 2007) from their origins in software development to the world of physical objects (Balka 2011: 4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?

Bonvoisin¹,

Mies²,

Boujut³

et al. 2017

Journal of Open Hardware

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?

Bonvoisin¹,

Mies²,

Boujut³

et al. 2017

Journal of Open Hardware

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted by Anderson (2012), Bajarin (2014), Evgeny (2014), Martin (2015), and Voigt et al (2016), these factors transformed consumers into creators. Sources have also acknowledged the catalytic and supportive role that Make magazine and Maker Media have played in the development and growth of the movement.…”

Section: The Maker Movementmentioning

confidence: 91%

University Makerspaces: Characteristics and Impact on Student Success in Engineering and Engineering Technology Education

Longo¹,

Yoder²,

Guerra³

et al.

2017 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alexandra (Alex) Longo currently serves as Program Manager of Education and Career Development at ASEE, where she leads the Online Learning initiative, manages externally funded programs and projects, and assists with stakeholder workshop development and implementation. Alex works closely with the ASEE Diversity Committee and the NSF-funded project NSF-funded project Promoting LGBTQ Equality in STEM. Prior to working at ASEE, Alex held positions related to education and events at the Solar Electric Power Association (SEPA) and the Society for Neuroscience (SfN), both in Washington, DC. Alex has a passion for instructional design, informal education, and hands-on learning, and received her MA in Museum Education from Seton Hall University in 2013. Dr. Brian Yoder, American Society for Engineering EducationDr. Yoder is the department director, guiding the overall direction of research and evaluation activities. Prior to working at ASEE, Brian worked at NASA Education, overseeing the development of an on-line performance management system to assess NASA's educational investments nationally. He also serves as President of the Washington Evaluators, a local affiliate of the American Evaluation Association. Dr. Rocio C. Chavela Guerra, American Society for Engineering EducationRocio Chavela is Director of Education and Career Development at the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). She holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University, a B.S. and a M.S. in Chemical Engineering from Universidad de las Americas, Puebla in Mexico. Rocio's current efforts focus on engineering faculty and graduate student development, with particular emphasis on the adoption of evidence-based instructional practices. Rossen Tsanov, AmericanSociety for Engineering Education c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 University Makerspaces: Characteristics and Impact on Student Success in Engineering and Engineering Technology Education AbstractWith the growth and increased visibility of the Maker Movement, a large number of makerspaces have been established in different venues, including community spaces, museums, and libraries. In the world of academia, makerspaces have multiplied on university and college campuses over the past decade, as spaces for students to enhance their education with creative and experiential learning. Makerspaces, as a supplement to traditional classroom learning, have the capacity to offer educational value to both engineering and engineering technology students. This paper explores how a respondent group of engineering deans and engineering technology deans and department chairs view, implement, and value Making and makerspaces within their academic institutions.In spring 2016, the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) distributed a survey to learn how and to what extent makerspaces are implemented in engineering and engineering technology schools and programs and to assess the perceived value of makerspaces and Making in these settings. The ultimate goal of this surve...

show abstract

“…However, it would be overly simplistic to reduce FabLabs to a set of shared machines open to the public. There exist different notions on what making entails, how making differs from hacking or what defines a maker space beyond the machinery found in a physical place [4]. According to [1], FabLabs are places that encourage collaborative learning, knowledge sharing and changing the local economy for the better.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity in FabLabs: Culture, Role Models and the Gendering of Making

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diversity and inclusion in the technology sector is increasingly debated, specially in the context of equal opportunities for all and a shortage of experts in many tech related industries. The need to be more inclusive can refer to different age groups, people with diverse culturally and linguistically backgrounds or gender. All in all, ethnic, gender and socio-economic diversity is not yet at the forefront of fabrication laboratories (FabLabs) agendas for change. This paper aims to contribute to the discussion of diversity and inclusion by primarily elaborating gender relations in FabLabs and, to a lesser extent, discussing age and socio-economic conditions of makers. Our analysis is based on 39 interviews and the analysis of 55,450 data points extracted from the log files of 3d-printers, CNC milling machines, laser cutters and cutting plotters. This combination of qualitative and quantitative data reveals that, indeed, some machines are used more frequently by men or women. However, the main difference is in absolute numbers, i.e. women are not joining FabLabs for a variety of reasons ranging from uninviting cultures to the lack of role models in technology driven areas in general.

show abstract

An Empirically Informed Taxonomy for the Maker Movement

Cited by 18 publications

References 21 publications

What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?

What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware?

University Makerspaces: Characteristics and Impact on Student Success in Engineering and Engineering Technology Education

Diversity in FabLabs: Culture, Role Models and the Gendering of Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About