Reading Review Part C - Reflections and Resources

Makerspace is very much a current and “hot” topic in schools and pedagogical discussions, there is a plethora of resources on the successes of Makerspaces, how to organize them and items to include in them. Amidst the various voices on this topic, I was grateful to come upon two trusted voices in my research about physical and virtual Makerspaces. I have encountered the writings of Loertscher and Fontichiaro in previous research and have appreciated their positive and innovative exhortations to educational excellence. 

1. What is Makerspace?

Loertscher, David V., Leslie Preddy, and Bill Derry. (2013). Makerspaces in the School Library Learning Commons and the uTEC Maker Model. Teacher Librarian, vol. 41, Iss. 2, p. 48-51.

For anyone curious about Makerspace and its fundamental themes and goals, this is the perfect article. Here Loertscher et al. describe the innovation continuum of the Makerspace model and the ultimate goals of the Maker movement. Along his continuum, Loertscher describes four levels of Maker ingenuity:

• Users: An early stage of participation in which students engage for enjoyment and produce expected outcomes
• Tinkering: Users become increasingly curious about their activities and “fiddle around” (Loertscher et al, 2013) with the activities to produce different results
• Experimenting: Users begin to produce something new through trial and error. At this stage, participants begin to ask and answer increasingly complex questions and practice producing new products
• Creating: The final stage, Creating is based on independent learning and actions. At this level, participants generate truly innovative products and design

What I appreciate about this article is the author’s description of the dispositions that develop throughout the creative phases. As students participate in Using, Tinkering, Experimenting and Creating they develop important networking skills such as personal expertise, cooperative group work and collaborative intelligence, all of which echo the NCTE 21^st Century Literacies. 

Retrieved from:  https://sites.google.com/site/utecmakermodel/

2. The Virtual Makerspace

Loertscher, David V. (2015) The Virtual Makerspace: A New Possibility?. Teacher Librarian, Vol 43, Iss 1, p. 50-51,67. 

In this fascinating sequel to the article above, Loertscher describes how a virtual Makerspace may be produced as an accompaniment to a physical Makerspace. He provides a series of website template designs as well as a few helpful current examples. He brings up the interesting point that, while many schools are acknowledging the need for more student-directed, project-based learning, many choose the “physical and hands-on learning” (2015) of genius hour. However, the virtual Makerspace provides an easily accessible multi-modal alternative that doesn’t require extra equipment, space or training.

Further, the virtual Makerspace may be incredibly effective at launching students deeper down the creative continuum. When students use a web tool to write a song or code a video game, they move beyond the sampling for enjoyment of the User stage and begin at the Experimenting stage of innovation with technical modifications or experimentation as they create a new song or write the code for an avatar action. 

This leads us to, perhaps, my most valuable resource. Not only is this website specifically geared toward my particular inquiry, it also stands out in its clarity, simplicity and excellent content.

Fort Richmond Collegiate, Winnipeg MB, retrieved from:

https://sites.google.com/site/frclearningcommons/home/physical-makerspace
https://sites.google.com/site/frclearningcommons/home/virtual-makerspace

This website, designed by Jo-Ann Gibson of the Manitoba School Library Association, hosts an excellent virtual Makerspace geared specifically toward intermediate learners! The author has a keen sense of the importance of both virtual and physical manifestations of the school’s Makerspace and the Learning Commons itself. She posts hours for the physical LC alongside the virtual LC; so too with the Makerspace. 

For the physical Makerspace, geared toward high school students, she provides a detailed list of the activities available: 3D printer, Lego Mindstorms, knitting supplies and robotics kits. The virtual Makerspace is a collection of websites powered by the Symbaloo bookmarking tool intended to provide students with opportunities for innovative creation with links for music composition, Howtoon, origami simulations, coding and sewing instructables among many others. The site also has links for student research and deeper learning through Maker Magazine, MIT and Python Programming, Popular Mechanics and Pinterest.

Fort Richmond’s collection of virtual tools such as Tinkercad and YoYo Gamemaker Studio push learners to create something new from the get-go making Experimenters and Creators out of Users. Further exploration of this topic may also include introducing ways of sharing student work with the learning community. Blogs, Vlogs or webpages might provide meaningful ways of sharing innovations with the wider world. 

Here is a helpful tutorial for how to set up your own Symbaloo Virtual Makerspace: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLGGV8ek88M  VIDEO

Also, a link to Symbaloo where you can create a free account and set up your own Virtual Makerspace: https://www.symbaloo.com/welcome

3. Assessment for Success

Professional dialogue on Makerspaces ranges from formal academic articles and theses to posters, podcasts, Instagram posts and youtube videos. There are many, many wonderful ideas out there! As I moved deeper into my explorations, however, assessment became increasingly important to me: How can we know we have a good Makerspace? Does more stuff make a great Makerspace? How can we tell if our students are moving beyond being simply Users? I did find one major gap in my research: I did not find much in the way of assessment – both for student outcomes and for the Makerspace activities themselves. 

In terms of assessment of the Makerspace itself, there appears to be a distinct lack of focussed attention to the individual activities. For example: A new 3D printer is certainly interesting and can produce some fascinating items, but is it being used in such a way as to push students to Loertscher’s fourth level of Creating in which students are actually inventing new products and becoming entrepreneurs? Likewise, on the other end of the spectrum, are students using the trusted standbys such as knitting and other craft supplies to dig into the deeper learning of testing, modifying and prototype invention? Few writers are observing the effectiveness of “classic” Maker activities in pushing learners toward innovation and creativity.

In terms of student assessment, there are many articles explaining how student achievement in academics is improved as students engage with Maker activities. However, I feel that this goes against the spirit of the Makerspace; Makerspaces are about unique, unexpected, unscripted innovations, not about helping students achieve higher scores on standardized tests.

The following article by Cun is helpful in answering this question. Driven by self-assessments, ongoing teacher observations and surveys, this article provides some concrete means of gauging quality of learning, creativity and work.  As an extension, I am grateful for the introduction to the NCTE’s 21^st Century Literacies from my readings in Richardson. These literacies provide a concrete collection of learning outcomes for students engaging in makerspace activities. I would be curious to see an assessment of student engagement of the NCTE literacies, or even Loertcher’s dispositions.

Cun, Aijuan & Abramovich, Sam. (2019). The Challenge of Assessment for Library Makerspaces. Retrieved from: https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1002/pra2.2018.14505501114

In my research, I found several articles by Cun, but this one provides the simplest matrix for assessing Makerspace success. Cun suggests incorporating simple assessment tools such as Observation, Self-assessment and Competition into everyday Makerspace practices for both summative and formative assessments.

4. Inspiration

Fontichiaro, Kristin. (2019). Refueling for the New Year: Tools and Inspirations. Teacher Librarian, Vol. 46, Iss. 3, p. 45-47,63.

This brief article provides a list of innovative Makerspace activities to include in an evolving Maker collection. The list includes online resources such as food photography tips, MeeperBot robotics supplies, gimlet screwdrivers, storage solutions and recommended books to bolster the collection.

Fontichiaro’s suggestions are a breath of fresh air for me, as a Makerspace designer. Not only does her helpful checklist provide a framework for each particular school situation, but her “jumpstart” (2017) ideas, like the food photography site, are truly unique. I have not yet used photography in a Makerspace, especially not food photography. But Fontichiaro’s idea invites students to engage with the school cafeteria or foods program which is a celebration of community and connectedness. I wonder what other ways we can encourage our Maker students to engage meaningfully with their broader community: participating in a class president campaign designing slogans, T-shirts and swag, supporting the mechanics students by refining or designing tools for specialized projects.

Fontichiaro writes widely on this subject and provides a Makerspace checklist at this site: (https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/1956466002?accountid=14656&pq-origsite=summon). 

Her checklist includes common and necessary supplies to build a new Makerspace, as well as a series of helpful questions for getting started and constructing a personal Makerspace philosophy. 

Resource List

 
Cun, Aijuan & Abramovich, Sam. (2019). The Challenge of Assessment for Library Makerspaces. Retrieved from: https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1002/pra2.2018.14505501114

Fontichiaro, Kristin. (2019). Refueling for the New Year: Tools and Inspirations. Teacher Librarian, Vol. 46, Iss. 3, p. 45-47,63.

Fort Richmond Collegiate Physical Makerspace. Retrieved from:

https://sites.google.com/site/frclearningcommons/home/physical-makerspace

Fort Richmond Collegiate Virtual Makerspace. Retrived from:

https://sites.google.com/site/frclearningcommons/home/virtual-makerspace

Loertscher, David V., Leslie Preddy, and Bill Derry. (2013). Makerspaces in the School Library Learning Commons and the uTEC Maker Model. Teacher Librarian, vol. 41, Iss. 2, p. 48-51.

Loertscher, David V., Leslie Preddy, and Bill Derry. (2013, December). The uTEC Maker Model. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/utecmakermodel/

 

Loertscher, David V. (2015) The Virtual Makerspace: A New Possibility?. Teacher Librarian, Vol 43, Iss 1, p. 50-51,67. 

Makerspace Checklist. Retrieved from: https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/1956466002?accountid=14656&pq-origsite=summon

Symbaloo Virtual Makerspace Tutorial. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLGGV8ek88M 

Symbaloo Virtual Makerspace Free Account. Retrieved from: https://www.symbaloo.com/welcome