The State of Makerspace Research: a Review of the Literature

Mersand, Shannon

doi:10.1007/s11528-020-00566-5

Cited by 76 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While the research literature on maker education has been extensively reviewed elsewhere (see for example, Hsu et al, 2017;Mersand, 2020), there are a few relevant points that should be made. Although the definitions for making can vary, in general, making is an "emerging form of educational practice that involves the design, construction, testing, and revision of a wide variety of objects, using high and low technologies, and integrating a range of disciplines including art, science, engineering, and mathematics" (Bevan, 2017, p. 75).…”

Section: Background On Maker-based Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Finding the Right Window Into What They’re Doing”: Assessment of Maker-based Learning Experiences Remotely

Wardrip

Saplan

Evancho³

2021

TechTrends

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the pandemic, teachers whose practice depends on maker-based learning have had the added challenge of translating their hands-on lessons for remote teaching. Yet with students making remotely, how can a teacher monitor the students' progress, offer timely feedback, or infer what the students understood? In short, how are teachers assessing this work? Working with a learning community of teachers who center hands-on making in their instruction regardless of academic discipline, this study was conducted to examine how teachers are supporting and assessing maker-based learning. Our study draws on observational field notes taken during the community's meetings, interviews with four focal teachers, and artifacts from the teachers' maker projects. Taking a values-based assessment approach, our findings reveal interesting shifts in teaching practice. Specifically, teachers incorporated social-emotional goals into the activities they design and monitor, students documented their artifacts and process, and teachers adapted to using low-tech materials to ensure accessibility while engaging remote students in their learning goals. These findings imply that not only can remote maker-based experiences can influence the role of students as assessors and the tools and materials they use for making but also how these practices revealed in remote settings could inform in-person settings.

show abstract

Section: Background On Maker-based Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Finding the Right Window Into What They’re Doing”: Assessment of Maker-based Learning Experiences Remotely

Wardrip

Saplan

Evancho³

2021

TechTrends

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fablabs or hackspaces are sometimes also referred to as makerspaces (Mersand, 2021), however, distinctions exist, especially with respect to their resources, tools, and/or purpose. Fablabs are typically associated with 3D printers and other digital fabrication tools (de Boer, 2015;Gershenfeld, 2010;Massachusetts Institute of Technology, n.d.;Mersand, 2021), while hackerspaces are associated with computer programming, coding, and computing technologies (Mersand, 2021;Schrock, 2014). As interest in these spaces increases, schools-K-12 and post-secondary institutions alike-rush to establish makerspaces, fabrication labs, and hackerspaces; however, critical analysis of the phenomenon has lagged.…”

Section: Department Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The maker movement led to the creation of locations in which individuals come together to create makerspaces. Makerspaces take on multiple forms and configurations: open access spaces with tools and resources available; spaces that are tied to curriculum; spaces that are scripted and based on the makerspace director; and/or, a combination of all of these compositions (Burke, 2013;Chu, Angello, et al, 2017;Gierdowski & Reis, 2015;Harron & Hughes, 2018;Mersand, 2021). Makerspaces exist in physical buildings, as well as in mobile and temporary locations (Blackley et al, 2017;Mersand, 2021).…”

Section: Department Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Making Takes a Holiday

Pinto

Blue

2021

Encounters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Making” is used to engage young people into ways of collaborative learning using materials, resources, and equipment in makerspace environments. In this paper we attempt to interrogate the popular maker movement’s “state-of-the-actual” in education with respect to its criticality. We begin by conceptually clarifying the movement with respect to its semantic disarray. Next, we situate maker and production pedagogies philosophically, and discuss how their thrust and emphasis create both hidden and overt curricula that can either cultivate or silence criticality. Finally, we problematize the effects of uncritical exuberance for educational making, and propose concrete strategies in which educators can nudge their own makerspaces into more state-of-the-art environments that promote criticality.

show abstract

“…Mersand [12] broadly defined makerspaces as "places where participants may work together to create and co-create knowledge and physical or digital products" (p. 175). Activities can range from engineering, tinkering, circuitry to crafting and forms of artistry, as well as much more [4,13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%