research-article

Bots for Tots: Building Inclusive Makerspaces by Leveraging "Ways of Knowing"

Author:

Nathan HolbertAuthors Info & Claims

IDC '16: Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

Pages 79 - 88

https://doi.org/10.1145/2930674.2930718

Published: 21 June 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Despite an explicit commitment to epistemic diversity, making and makerspaces have struggled to serve a diverse population of creators and have become heavily dominated by men. Drawing on the construct of "ways of knowing" from the feminist tradition the Bots for Tots project explores the affordances of activity framings and structures that tap into alternate mental dispositions to broaden participation and interest in maker activities. In this paper I present data from a workshop with 9-10 year olds explicitly framed to be about making toys for children in the community. I show that when making is framed as being a set of practices, skills, and technologies to give back to and support members of one's community, young girls were highly motivated to engage in the maker activity, persisted through construction challenges, and showed interest in further exploring making and technology to help others.

References

[1]

Barrington, L. and Duffy, J. 2007. Attracting underrepresented groups to engineering with service-learning. Proceedings of the 2007 American Society of Engineering Education International Exposition and Conference (2007).

[2]

Belenky, M.F. et al. 1986. Women's Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. Basic Books.

[3]

Bielefeldt, A. et al. 2009. Measuring the impacts of project-based service learning. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings (2009).

[4]

Bilefsky, D. 2015. Women Respond to Nobel Laureate's "Trouble With Girls." The New York Times.

[5]

Blikstein, P. 2013. Digital fabrication and "making" in education: The democratization of invention. FabLabs: Of Machines, Makers and Inventors. (2013), 1--21.

[6]

Blikstein, P. 2008. Travels in Troy with Freire: Technology as an agent of emancipation. Freire and the Possible Dream. Sense Publishers. 205--244.

[7]

Brofenbrenner, U. 1979. The ecology of human development: Experiment by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

[8]

Buchholz, B. et al. 2014. Hands On, Hands Off: Gendered Access in Crafting and Electronics Practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity. 21, 4 (Oct. 2014), 278--297.

[9]

Buechley, L. 2013. Thinking about making.

[10]

Buechley, L. and Hill, B.M. 2010. LilyPad in the Wild: How Hardware's Long Tail is Supporting New Engineering and Design Communities. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (New York, NY, USA, 2010), 199--207.

Digital Library

[11]

Buechley, L. and Perner-Wilson, H. 2012. Crafting Technology: Reimagining the Processes, Materials, and Cultures of Electronics. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 19, 3 (Oct. 2012), 21:1--21:21.

Digital Library

[12]

Costa Jr., P. et al. 2001. Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 81, 2 (2001), 322--331.

[13]

DesPortes, K. et al. under review. From puppets to dance: Using meta-design to create value-driven learning. (under review).

[14]

Diekman, A.B. et al. 2010. Seeking Congruity Between Goals and Roles A New Look at Why Women Opt Out of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Careers. Psychological Science. 21, 8 (Aug. 2010), 1051--1057.

[15]

Dougherty, D. 2012. The maker movement. innovations. 7, 3 (2012), 11--14.

[16]

Duffy, J. 2008. Village Empowerment: Service-learning with Continuity. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering, Humanitarian Engineering and Social Entrepreneurship. 3, 2 (Sep. 2008).

[17]

Ginsburg, H.P. 1997. Entering the Child's Mind: The Clinical Interview in Psychological Research and Practice. Cambridge University Press.

[18]

Halverson, E.R. and Sheridan, K. 2014. The Maker Movement in Education. Harvard Educational Review. 84, 4 (Dec. 2014), 495--504.

[19]

Harel, I. and Papert, S. 1990. Software Design as a Learning Environment. Interactive Learning Environments. 1, 1 (Mar. 1990), 1--32.

[20]

Intel Corporation 2014. MakeHers Report: Engaging Girls and Women in Technology through Making, Creating, and Inventing.

[21]

Kafai, Y.B. et al. 2014. Electronic Textiles as Disruptive Designs: Supporting and Challenging Maker Activities in Schools. Harvard Educational Review. 84, 4 (Dec. 2014), 532--556.

[22]

Kafai, Y.B. and Burke, Q. 2014. Connected Code: Why Children Need to Learn Programming. MIT Press.

[23]

Kafai, Y.B. and Peppler, K.A. 2014. Transparency Reconsidered: Creative, Critical, and Connected Making with E-textiles. DIY Citizenship: Critical Making and Social Media. MIT Press. 179--188.

[24]

Keller, E.F. 1984. A Feeling for the Organism, 10th Aniversary Edition: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. Macmillan.

[25]

Konrad, A.M. et al. 2000. Sex differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 126, 4 (2000), 593--641.

[26]

Lippa, R. 1998. Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people--things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74, 4 (1998), 996--1009.

[27]

Maker Media 2014. Attendee Study Maker Faire Bay Area 2014.

[28]

Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. 2003. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. MIT Press.

[29]

Miyashita, K. and Knezek, G. 1992. The Young Children's Computer Inventory: A Likert Scale for Assessing Attitudes Related to Computers in Instruction. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education. 3, 1 (1992), 63--72.

Digital Library

[30]

Moilanen, J. 2012. Emerging Hackerspaces -- Peer-Production Generation. Open Source Systems: Long-Term Sustainability. I. Hammouda et al., eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 94--111.

[31]

National Science Foundation 2015. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering.

[32]

Papert, S. 1980. Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

Digital Library

[33]

Ratcliffe, R. 2015. Nobel scientist Tim Hunt: female scientists cause trouble for men in labs. The Guardian.

[34]

Schwartz, S.H. and Rubel, T. 2005. Sex differences in value priorities: Cross-cultural and multimethod studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 89, 6 (2005), 1010--1028.

[35]

Swan, C.W. et al. 2009. Panel - measuring the impacts of project-based service learning in engineering education. 39th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2009. FIE '09 (Oct. 2009), 1--2.

Digital Library

[36]

Teachers College Community School: Enrollment Data (2014-15): http://data.nysed.gov/enrollment.php?year=2015&instid=800000070865. Accessed: 2016-01-25.

[37]

Tsang, E. et al. 2001. A Report on Service-Learning and Engineering Design: Service-Learning's Effect on Students Learning Engineering Design inIntroduction to Mechanical Engineering'. International Journal of Engineering Education. 17, 1 (2001), 30--39.

[38]

Tyler-Wood, T. et al. 2010. Instruments for Assessing Interest in STEM Content and Careers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 18, 2 (2010), 345--368.

[39]

Weisgram, E.S. and Bigler, R.S. 2006. Girls and science careers: The role of altruistic values and attitudes about scientific tasks. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 27, 4 (Jul. 2006), 326--348.

[40]

Wilensky, U. 1991. Abstract meditations on the concrete and concrete implications for mathematics education. Constructionism. I. Harel and S. Papert, eds. Ablex Publishing Corp.

[41]

Wilensky, U. 1996. Making sense of probability through paradox and programming: A case study in a connected mathematics framework. Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Lawrence Erlbaum.

[42]

Women in IT: The Facts Infographic: 2015. https://www.ncwit.org/resources/women-it-facts-infographic-2015-update. Accessed: 2016-01-26.

Cited By

Severance SMiller EKrajcik J(2024)IF science AND making AND computing: Insights for project-based learning and primary science curriculum designStudies in Science Education10.1080/03057267.2024.2397300(1-65)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2024.2397300
Oh HHsi SPosner NDixon CSmith TCheng T(2024)Making computing visible & tangibleInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.10060238:COnline publication date: 27-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100602
Ralph RMacDowell PLee YNg D(2022)STEM Education for GirlsResearch Anthology on Makerspaces and 3D Printing in Education10.4018/978-1-6684-6295-9.ch029(584-601)Online publication date: 6-May-2022
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6295-9.ch029
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Bots for Tots: Building Inclusive Makerspaces by Leveraging "Ways of Knowing"
1. Applied computing
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education

Recommendations

Leveraging cultural values and "ways of knowing" to increase diversity in maker activities

Though the "maker movement" has become an international phenomenon in recent years it has been mostly embraced by highly educated and wealthy men. As the makerspaces and fabrication labs become a more mainstream method used by schools to motivate ...
Bots for Tots: Girls' Perceived Versus Actual Competency in Technology and Making
IDC '17: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children

This study explores how young girls perceive technology and making as part of their identity. The data presented here is part of a larger study on 38 fourth grade students (aged 9-11) taking an Engineering and Design class at an all-girls private school ...
We Are Not All Makers: The Paradox of Plurality In The Maker Movement
DIS '18 Companion: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems

This paper draws from a critical examination of media and literature surrounding the maker movement, and interviews with 10 women engaged in maker activities. It aims to explore the barriers to women's participation in the maker movement and, in ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

IDC '16: Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

June 2016

774 pages

ISBN:9781450343138

DOI:10.1145/2930674

Conference Chairs:
Janet C. Read
University of Central Lancashire, UK
,
Phil Stenton
BBC Research & Development, UK

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 June 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

IDC '16

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

IDC '16: Interaction Design and Children

June 21 - 24, 2016

Manchester, United Kingdom

Acceptance Rates

IDC '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 36 of 77 submissions, 47%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 172 of 578 submissions, 30%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

28
Total Citations
View Citations
480
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)36
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 21 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Severance SMiller EKrajcik J(2024)IF science AND making AND computing: Insights for project-based learning and primary science curriculum designStudies in Science Education10.1080/03057267.2024.2397300(1-65)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2024.2397300
Oh HHsi SPosner NDixon CSmith TCheng T(2024)Making computing visible & tangibleInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.10060238:COnline publication date: 27-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100602
Ralph RMacDowell PLee YNg D(2022)STEM Education for GirlsResearch Anthology on Makerspaces and 3D Printing in Education10.4018/978-1-6684-6295-9.ch029(584-601)Online publication date: 6-May-2022
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6295-9.ch029
Desportes KMcDermott KBergner YPayne W(2022)“Go[ing] Hard...as a Woman of Color”: A Case Study Examining Identity Work within a Performative Dance and Computing Learning EnvironmentACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/353100022:4(1-29)Online publication date: 15-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531000
Mahboob Kanafi MIivari NKinnula MSharma S(2022)Uncovering Children's Situated Design Capital – A Nexus Analytic InquiryProceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3501712.3529732(408-421)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3501712.3529732
Brady CJen TVogelstein LDim E(2022)Designing with FeelingProceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3501712.3529725(315-326)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3501712.3529725
Yu JHsi SVan Doren SOh H(2022)My:Talkies: Designing a Craft Kit to Support Learning about Communication Devices through MakingProceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3501712.3529720(442-447)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3501712.3529720
Hagerman MCotnam-Kappel MTurner JHughes J(2022)Literacies in the Making: Exploring elementary students’ digital-physical meaning-making practices while crafting musical instruments from recycled materialsTechnology, Pedagogy and Education10.1080/1475939X.2021.1997794(1-22)Online publication date: 27-Jan-2022
https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1997794
Iivari NSharma SVentä-Olkkonen LMolin-Juustila TKuutti KHolappa JKinnunen E(2022)Critical agenda driving child–computer interaction research—Taking a stock of the past and envisioning the futureInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.10040832:COnline publication date: 3-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100408
Campreguer França NSmit DWuschitz SFuchsberger V(2021)The Women* Who Made It: Experiences from Being a Woman* at a Maker FestivalSustainability10.3390/su1316936113:16(9361)Online publication date: 20-Aug-2021
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169361
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents