Mindful Makers: Question Prompts to Help Guide Young Peoples' Critical Technical Practices in Maker Spaces in Libraries, Museums, and Community-based Youth Organizations
In this episode I unpack Bowler and Champagne’s (2009) publication titled “Mindful makers: Question prompts to help guide young peoples' critical technical practices in maker spaces in libraries, museums, and community-based youth organizations,” which "examines question prompts as a means to scaffold reflection and reflexivity in the design, development, and use of technological artifacts in maker spaces for youth at public libraries, museums, and community-based organizations" (abstract).
-
Welcome back to another episode of the
CSK8 podcast my name is Jared O'Leary
this week I'm going to be unpacking some
scholarship in particular I'm going to
be building off of what kind of talked
about two weeks ago with the article
that was discussing different categories
of questions or types of questions and
I'm going to talk about some questions
in some makerspaces the way I'm going to
do so is I'm going to unpack an article
about using questions within a
makerspace now maker spaces and make
your culture is pretty relevant to CS
education as you'll have noticed in many
of the podcast interviews that that have
been appearing on the show many of the
guests have talked about informal
learning or rhizomatic learning or just
learning in general that is not linear a
part of maker culture and makeup
practices often is the idea that
learning is not linear or kind of goes
in several different directions or at
least can so for this episode in the
next two episodes I'm going to talk a
little bit about maker culture and maker
practices as they kind of relate to CS
education so today's article is by Liane
bowler and Ryan champagne sorry if I
mispronounced any names but the title is
called quote mindful makers : question
prompts to help guide young people's as
critical technical practices in maker
spaces in libraries museums and
community-based youth organizations end
quote pretty long title okay so here's
the actual abstract from the paper
itself quote this study examines
question prompts as a mean to scaffold
reflection in reflexivity in the design
development and use of technical
artifacts in maker spaces for youth at
public libraries museums and
community-based organizations
qualitative analysis is applied to data
gathered in four focus groups with teams
three semi-structured interviews with
adults who facilitate maker spaces and
six observation sessions outcomes
include a rich description of critical
thinking in the context of technology
practice and secondly a set of eight
activation questions that serve as a
toolkit to encourage reflection and
scaffold mindful and critical practices
in community-based maker spaces for
youth results from the study support the
development of instruments and practices
to support mindful making and critical
technical practice in maker spaces for
youth in quote alright so if I were to
actually summarize this paper in one
sentence I'd go with the author
description at the very beginning of the
abstract which is this study examines
question prompts as a means to scaffold
reflection and reflexivity in the design
development and use of technological
artifacts in maker spaces for youth at
public libraries museums and
community-based organizations make
that's actually an excellent one
sentence summary of this particular
publication as a friendly reminder if
you're interested in actually reading
this publication or in seeing other
articles published by any of the
author's mentioned in the show you can
simply go to jared O'Leary comm and
click on these show notes for this
episode or just go into your podcast app
and click on the show notes there and it
should take you directly to it so again
all of the author names will take you to
the google scholar profile and then the
actual title for the paper when you
click on that it'll take you to the
paper itself so the authors begin by
kind of posing the question of whether
and how critical thinking practices
might occur within a makerspace with
four young kids whenever you hear me
talking about the questions that are in
here and mention maker spaces just think
of how you might be able to consider
applying some of these within your
computer science classroom or your
classroom that happens to integrate
computer science so here's a quote from
page 117 the question prompt is a verbal
tool that can reveal variables
associated with self-regulation
self-awareness reflection and
reflexivity opening a window of thought
processes during the making process
question prompts can also if skilfully
applied provide a metacognitive scaffold
to help steer novice makers towards a
critical technical practice in maker
spaces and quote so in other words if
kids are thinking through some of the
question prompts that are posed within
this particular publication the authors
suggest that this might actually help
kids think a little bit more critically
about what they're creating in a
classroom now one of the things that I
really appreciated in this particular
article is that the office posed a lot
of questions throughout the article
itself so I've included a list of some
of those questions consider in the show
notes and hopefully this kind of will
serve as a teaser to read the full
article itself which is definitely worth
looking into more ok so in the
literature review when they're
discussing maker movements here are a
few quotes on page 118 that kind of
summarized what the makers movement is
so quote maker spaces places for work
and play that foster inventive
production and X
rushon in a communal environment offer
individuals opportunities to experiment
with digital and analog technologies as
conduits for creation any central
learning and quote so that actually
sounds a lot like the coding classes
that I used to facilitate in grades K
through 8 and what we encourage people
to do in the professional development
that we provide through the nonprofit
that I work for boot-up BD here's
another quote from 118 o makerspaces
embody making sharing giving learning
tooling up playing participating
supporting and changing in quote so in
other words there's a lot of creativity
and diverse ways of engagement going on
within the class itself
now the authors also suggests that maker
spaces can kind of be described as
multidisciplinary which is a common
phrase used among maker culture which is
often described by curriculum scholars
as interdisciplinary or
transdisciplinary as multidisciplinary
means something else in curriculum
scholarship and that's generally
speaking there we want to actually read
more about that my dissertation kind of
unpacks the different ways that
different fields related to education
talk about multidisciplinary
interdisciplinary transdisciplinary
integrated etc but that's just me
talking nerdy right now so I'm gonna get
off that that soapbox now one of the
things that is a kind of a big part
about maker cultures is these following
quote from also on page 118 it's quote
production offers value beyond an end
product for makers they develop new
literacies by engaging with tools and
processes that may not surface in
conventional learning environments
enclose so a big part about maker
practices in general is that the process
is extremely valued and this is also
kind of one of the things that is also
valued and constructivism or
constructionism as well is that it's the
process in engaging with or creating
some kind of a computer science or
coding project or anything in general
that is more valuable than what is
created itself in terms of learning so
that's kind of their overview of the
maker movement within education in their
literature view they also discuss other
areas such as critical technical
practice which is the lens they use for
analyzing the data that I'll discuss in
a little bit and
they kind of provide a short summary of
scholarship on mindful making and it's a
relationship with education agendas
metacognition interpersonal knowledge
and deeper learning so for interested in
reading more scholarship about that
check out this review of literature at
the start of this particular publication
okay so this study actually looks at
three after-school makerspace programs
in Pittsburgh there's a quote from page
in in the focus group the numbers
depending on attendance in the program
on that day throughout the research
project approximately 45 teams six adult
mentors and six administrative staff
members were engaged with during the
course of this research project in quote
so data was actually collected in spring
of 2014 over six different observations
four focus groups with the teens and
then three semi-structured interviews
with the adult mentors participated in
this particular project
now the actual analysis or theoretical
lens that was used for this is called
critical technical practice and on page
technical practice questions our
assumptions about how people interact
with technology and emphasizes the role
that designers have in mediating that
interaction in quote to elaborate on it
here's another quote from the same page
coke CTP suggests that the process of
making a technological artifact can be a
political act with social consequences
that impact not just the maker and final
end user but also larger society the
suggestion being that makers who are
unaware of themselves as actors in the
making process are in some way working
blind in quote so the basic idea of
looking at CTP critical techno practice
and the questions that are kind of asked
is to get kids to kind of understand
that one they are or can be makers and
to the things that they make can have an
impact on society now as a general note
the mentors within the makerspace tried
to avoid becoming a crutch for the kids
who participated in it so rather than
answering questions directly or kind of
giving lectures on how to do stuff they
would often respond to questions by
encouraging makers to figure out things
on their own or by asking some more
questions to kind of guide them through
this so this kind of relates to the
approaches that have been mentioned in
some of the interviews and then two
weeks ago the
Scholarship episode where I kind of talk
about some different questioning
techniques the open guided closed
analytical judicial and creative
questions as well so on page 120 and 121
they have a list of some questions that
were intended to stimulate deeper
thinking and critical practices through
the maker processes that Cs educators
might actually be able to use in their
classroom so the questions are what will
make me happy who is my audience what
resources do I have in need what will
inspire me to give my time and effort to
a project what do I know can I let
myself make a mistake how will my
creation affect other people what kind
of maker am i okay so let's kind of
unpack each one of those both in terms
of what the authors have for
implications and then how this might
relate to computer science education so
the first one what will make me happy
according to the teams in the study the
heart of making processes is having fun
or engaging in some kind of a
pleasurable experience related to making
within that space so that is something
that I really tried to focus on in the
classes that I was working with so the
k-8 coding classes that I designed and
facilitated in Avondale Arizona they
they were mandated by all the kids in
the school so several hundred kids were
forced to be in the classroom that they
may or may not have an interest in so my
goal was to try and find some way to
make this process in an engaging and fun
experience for everybody who was
required to be there now this is a
approach that I mentioned before in
interviews that is different than how I
might approach a class where kids are
opting to be there so like when I have
facilitated elective courses or even
graduate courses at the University of a
level where people are paying to be
there I know there's some kind of a
buy-in inherently with either the course
topic itself or the broader degree topic
as a whole so I don't have to think
about this as much as a course that is
forced on a kid who might not have any
kind of interest in computer science or
coding to begin with now the second
question who is my audience so I think
this is an excellent question to think
through to kind of get at some of the
standards like the CSTA standards or
even asti's standards that are on
thinking through diverse perspectives
and end users when creating or making
some kind of a product or artistic
expression so for example thinking
through how someone who is dead
might engage with a project that has a
lot of sounds or music now the next
question what resources do I have and
need so this is a good question to think
through in terms of like the constraints
are important to consider like what kind
of resources do I have and am i limited
to so if I want to be able to create a B
and C but I only have X Y & Z for
resources I might not be able to do that
but this is also kind of a good way of
thinking through inspiration so here's a
quote from page 121 so as quote as one
teen explained one of her first actions
when launching a maker project is to
look around the space and ask herself
what can I use to inspire me in quote so
I think that's a really good way of kind
of framing this in terms of affordances
like what can this do for me
and how many create something that's
interesting to me using the resources
that I have available to me now from a
computer science perspective the
resources might not just be the physical
hardware that you're using within a
class as is typical of many maker spaces
in terms of like what kind of tools do I
have and resources gonna make but also
the software so thinking through what
kind of platforms do I have what kind of
languages do I have and several of the
past interviews on this podcast have
kind of talked through that in
particular the interview with John
Stapleton kind of unpacks affordances
and constraints a bit more so the next
question is what will inspire me to give
my time and effort to a project here is
a quote from page 121 makers assess the
value of a project according to the
balance between their knowledge and
skills and the degree of meaningfulness
that the project has for them too much
interest coupled with too little
knowledge might mean extra time and
effort but if the project is interesting
enough time and effort might be worth it
by asking this question one begins to
plan for engagement in the making
process unquote now I think this is a
really good point to take it in
consideration this kind of builds off of
Vygotsky is zone of proximal development
or csikszentmihalyi's
idea of flow and other people who kind
of talk about things in different ways
the idea that your level of effort and
energy and time that you can put into
something needs to be balanced with your
current abilities and how difficult it
is to complete what you're working on
having had a lot of experiences in
different subject areas with
this particular topic I will say that I
strongly recommend people engage in what
they're interested in even if it is more
difficult than what they are currently
capable of doing at the moment in terms
of skills or abilities so for example
when I worked with young musicians who
were working on a piece of music that
was very difficult for them but if they
are super motivated to learn that piece
of music like they just loved that piece
of music and I was like yeah great we'll
just go really slow and as long as
you're okay with that then I will help
you through that however if they really
liked a piece but they weren't willing
to put in the time to work on it because
it was too difficult for them then I
usually say well here's how much time
it's going to take to be able to play
that thing really well are you willing
to invest that amount of time into it
and then often people would say no let's
work on something easier so basically
what I'm saying is it might help to kind
of have kids think through whether or
not their level of inspiration to work
on something kind of matches the amount
of time they're willing to put into a
project or able to put into a project so
the author's mentioned that
self-assessment is kind of a key part of
maker practices and the question what do
I know is one excellent way of kind of
getting at that now this can definitely
be applied in computer science education
so for example one of the things that I
loved to do was to kind of ask questions
like these related to a project whether
it be through formative or ape sort of
assessments so episode of assessments is
kind of like a self-reflection of
understanding in relation to prior
understanding so like when a kid
finished a project I'd be like great how
does your understandings in this project
compare to your prior project etc so if
you're if you're not familiar if it's
it've in the show notes I've got a
couple links to some resources that
unpack episode of assessment more so
asking what do I know and engaging in
those self assessment practices can be
really helpful and is something that I
highly recommend so not only are the
self assessment type of questions
something that I highly value it's
actually something that I encourage in
the free lesson plans that I create at
boot up PD org you can find a link in
the show notes you're interested in
checking those out again all three
hundred percent and then in the
professional development at Buda so it
is really something that I strongly
recommend this is not just me paying lip
service to self assessment it's
something that we reiterate in every
lesson that I create and then in the PD
that we facilitate so the next question
is can I let myself make amis
yes all right so the next question no
just kidding okay so a question that I
might ask is when is failure so as an
example from page 123 here's a question
that the author's posed quote if the end
product isn't used in the expected
manner is it a failure in quote so I
think questions like that are good
things to think through I mean yes we as
computer science educators are costly
like yes debugging is a practice so that
you're gonna engage in even if you don't
want to it's just part of engaging in
computer science and and hardware and
software and whatnot you're gonna find
mistakes they're gonna find bugs you're
gonna find things that can be improved
upon but my question is more about like
well when do we actually consider
something to be a failure and how can we
reframe that into making it as something
as a positive so the question how will
my creation affect other people this can
be used for thinking through like a
range of impact from positive through
negative so like a positive thing might
be like how might what I'm creating help
somebody whereas a negative might be
well how might what I create
unintentionally harm someone else or
another group of people so this can
relate to computer science standards
that are about seeking diverse
perspectives and considering other
viewpoints when developing and designing
accessible software and hardware and the
final question what kind of a maker am I
so from page 123 here's a following
quote when asked to define himself as a
maker one adult mentor described a
complex collection of identities rather
than a single stable identity and quote
now this is something that really
relates to me so on my website if you've
been to it you'll notice that I have a
comment underneath my name is the two
slashes it says multiplicity so I
describe myself as a multiplicity which
kind of means that I am many different
identities depending on the different
contexts that I'm in and the reason why
I do this is because I'm trying to point
out that depending on who I'm talking to
and where I'm at I might identify as a
computer science educator or am I
identify as a music educator or am i
identify as somebody who has dogs or
somebody who has a loving spouse or
somebody who plays video games like
there are many different things that I
identify as but to kind of like put it
back into this context within a
makerspace
there are so many different ways that
you can engage with different practices
whether it be soldering something
or coding something or sewing something
or designing something or a million of
other different possibilities within a
makerspace
now this is also the case in computer
science education so yes you might be
engaging in coding practices if your
class was a programming class however
there are many different types of
identities that can be associated with
yourself when you are programming
something the reason why I'm emphasizing
this is because there is not one way of
engaging in computer science or
programming and there are many different
kind of identities or ways of being that
can be brought to the table when you
engage in some practices that encourage
kids to create things that are
interesting to them especially if you're
engaging what is often referred to
nowadays as culturally relevant pedagogy
and that being said I will say that the
more you kind of identify within a group
or domain the better the overall
experience at least this is from my
perspective and some of the scholarship
on communities of practice and affinity
spaces is if you can get kids to kind of
understand that one of their identities
can be as a computer scientist or as a
programmer that will likely help them
with their engagement in the classroom
itself all right so those were the main
prompts that they suggest asking kids
within a makerspace and they don't
suggest this it was like front-loading
it at the beginning or putting at the
very end but you can kind of ask this
throughout a process so perhaps you
might consider trying some of these
questions or modifying similar questions
within the computer science classes that
you are working with I've got a couple
of lingering questions for this
particular study one of them is when and
why our maker or inquiry based practices
encouraged or discouraged now here's a
quote from page 122 learning and
makerspaces may require a different take
on the typical approach to knowing what
you know in the classic version of the
inquiry process learners begin by
questioning the boundaries of their
knowledge and then end with a new
creation in makerspaces
the inquiry process is inverted turn
upside down as it were makers start by
creating and then in with understanding
the question what do I know should be
asked within the context of creating and
not as a precursor to the process
include so while I love this overall
sentiment and approach I do wonder where
such an approach may or not be
encouraged
in an educational context so for example
some administrators want to have
predictable outcomes in a lesson project
or unit or some educators want kids to
know what they're going to create before
they create it yes you can iterate on it
but we need to have some kind of idea
what you're gonna do rather than just
flying by the seat of your pants so
another question that I have is what
kind of questions are prompts might CS
educators reflect upon to improve their
own pedagogical practices or
understandings so this publication is
more about potential questions that an
adult might be able to ask a kid within
an educational context however I'm
wondering what are some of the questions
that we as educators or facilitators
might be able to ask ourselves to kind
of further improve our own
understandings for example perhaps
engaging in a weekly monthly or
quarterly review where you kind of think
through okay what are some of the things
that I'm trying to have improved upon
with my pedagogy or with my own
understandings in computer science so as
an example if you are a brand-new
computer science educator and you've
been in the classroom for a while you
might be like okay how am i trying to
improve my understanding of a particular
language or platform that is being used
in a class or if you're brand new to
education in general and have an
understanding computer science you might
ask questions like how might I improve
student engagement within the classes
that I facilitate so thinking through
some of the pedagogy now I will say that
as positive as these questions are and
as the maker movement is discussed in
many articles including the one that
will release two weeks from now the
article that I'm going to unpack in four
weeks is actually a pretty critical of
maker culture discourse so I just wanted
to give you a little teaser on that
because this isn't all just positive
things maker culture isn't this like
grand thing that's gonna revolutionize
education there are some problematic
things in terms of the discourse that
we'll talk about later on that kind of
summarizes the main points of this
article and some of the main questions
that you might be able to ask in
relation to CS education and some of my
own questions that are lingering after
having read this so as a friendly
reminder if you're interested in
learning more about some of the
questioning techniques I do have a video
that I created for Buddha that is shared
within the show notes for this that you
can find at Ghirardelli recom or by
clicking the link in the description for
your podcast
with in the shownotes you also find link
to chapter 2 my dissertation which also
summarizes more scholarship on maker
culture I hope you enjoyed this episode
next week is going to be another
interview and then the week after that
we'll be back again with another
unpacking scholarship episode
Article
Bowler, L., & Champagne, R. (2016). Mindful makers: Question prompts to help guide young peoples’ critical technical practices in maker spaces in libraries, museums, and community-based youth organizations. Library and Information Science Research, 38(2), 117–124.
Abstract
“This study examines question prompts as a means to scaffold reflection and reflexivity in the design, development, and use of technological artifacts in maker spaces for youth at public libraries, museums, and community-based organizations. Qualitative analysis is applied to data gathered in four focus groups with teens, three semi-structured interviews with adults who facilitate maker spaces, and six observation sessions. Outcomes include a rich description of critical thinking in the context of technology practice, and secondly, a set of eight activation questions that serve as a tool kit to encourage reflection and scaffold mindful and critical practices in community-based maker spaces for youth. Results from this study support the development of nstruments [sic] and practices to support mindful making and critical technical practice in maker spaces for youth.”
One Sentence Summary
"This study examines question prompts as a means to scaffold reflection and reflexivity in the design, development, and use of technological artifacts in maker spaces for youth at public libraries, museums, and community-based organizations" (abstract).
Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts
When and why are maker or inquiry-based practices encouraged or discouraged?
What kind of questions or prompts might CS educators reflect upon to improve their own pedagogical practices or understandings?
Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode
Other podcast episodes that were mentioned or are relevant to this episode
Assessment Considerations: A Simple Heuristic
In this episode I read and unpack my (2019) publication titled “Assessment Considerations: A Simple Heuristic,” which is intended to serve as a heuristic for creating or selecting an assessment.
How to Get Started with Computer Science Education
In this episode I provide a framework for how districts and educators can get started with computer science education for free.
Intersections of Equity, Making, and Computer Science with Roxana Hadad
In this interview with Roxana Hadad, we discuss the blurring of formal and informal learning within makerspaces and culture, how Roxana’s understanding of education evolved over time, feeling lost when having too much choice with one’s learning, the intersections of makerspaces and equity, problematizing discourse and definitions around computational thinking and computer science, preventing burnout while working on many different projects, feeling a lack of agency in education, the future of communication for academics, and so much more.
Making Sense of Making: Defining Learning Practices in MAKE Magazine
In this episode I unpack Brahms and Crowley’s (2016) publication titled “Making sense of making: Defining learning practices in MAKE magazine,” which is a content analysis that uses communities of practice as a framework for exploring maker practices evident within MAKE magazine.
Making Through the Lens of Culture and Power: Toward Transformative Visions for Educational Equity
In this episode I unpack Vossoughi, Hooper, and Escudé’s (2016) publication titled “Making through the lens of culture and power: Toward transformative visions for educational equity,” which provides a critique of maker culture discourse in order to "reconceptualize the educational practice of making in ways that place equity at the center" (p. 215).
Reconceptualizing “Music Making:” Music Technology and Freedom in the Age of Neoliberalism
In this episode I unpack Benedict and O’Leary’s (2019) publication titled “Reconceptualizing “music making:” Music technology and freedom in the age of Neoliberalism,” which explores the use of computer science practices to counter neoliberal influence on education.
Talking About [Computer Science]: Better Questions? Better Discussions!
In this episode I unpack Allsup and Baxter’s (2004) publication titled “Talking about music: Better questions? Better discussions!” which is a short article that discusses open, guided, and closed questions, as well as a framework for encouraging critical thinking through questions. Although this article is published in a music education journal, I discuss potential implications for computer science educators.
Some of the questions and prompts posed within the article:
"Can [critical technical] thinking be supported in the context of a maker space for young people and if so, how?" (p. 117)
"How might we develop this critical attitude in young people? How can young people's experiences as digital makers go beyond product-oriented activities focused on procedural “how-to-do-it” learning, to include notions of reflection, critique, assessment, and agency in relation to the technology that they make?"(p. 118)
"What are the questions that adult mentors (expert makers) ask themselves when they create technological artifacts? • What are the questions that adult mentors (expert makers) ask young people when they (youth) create technological artifacts in maker spaces? • What are the questions that youth (novice makers) ask themselves when they create technological artifacts in maker spaces? • What problematics and self-reflective thinking are captured by these questions?" (p. 118)
"What assumptions do I have about this object and how it will work? Why do I like this? Or, why does it bore me? What do I know about this technology and equally, what do I not know?" (p. 118)
"What will be the effect of this technology not just on me but on others? On society?" (p. 119)
"How can such habits of mind be developed in maker spaces for youth in libraries, museums, and community centers, environments guided by interest-driven learning rather than the formal lessons of the classroom, and where teens can easily drop in (and out) of activities?" (p. 119)
"• What will make me happy? • Who is my audience? • What resources do I have and need? • What will inspire me to give my time and effort to a project? • What do I know? • Can I let myself make a mistake? • How will my creation affect other people? • What kind of maker am I?" (pp. 120-121)
"But given that maker spaces for teens may be one of their few entry points to rich, constructionist learning, one wonders which site might inspire deeper learning and better practices of mindful making—the one that overflows with resources or the one with very little? If creativity (or at least, a sense that one is creative) and inspiration are tied to the nature of the available physical objects then to what degree must provide a well-stocked maker space?" (p. 121)
"How exactly can a voluntary, after-school program inspire “stick-with-it-ness”, so essential to facilitating the deeper questions about making?" (p. 122)
"If the end product isn't used in the expected manner, is it a failure?" (p. 123)
"To what degree should questions about the politics of artifacts arise in a youth-oriented maker space? How can complex sociological arguments be raised in the rough and tumble world of a drop-in, after-school program?" (p. 123)
Standards
Chapter Two of my dissertation briefly summarizes maker culture
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter
Free CS Resources I Have Created
More Content
