"Can I Do That Next?" Exploring Legitimate Youth-STEM Pathways in an Informal Maker/Engineering After-School Program

• In Event: Equity and Access in Science: Understanding Pathways Frameworks for Youth Learning and Development

Abstract

Objectives
The “STEM pipeline” metaphor has been criticized as narrow and homogenizing, with a disregard for contexts and power dynamics to those who are raced, classed, and gendered (e.g., Cannady et al, 2014). The field continues to document the lack of representation (“leaky pipeline”) of minoritized youth and girls in higher level science classes (e.g. Leboy, 2008). Research suggests that high-quality, out-of-school experiences can positively impact engagement/learning, particularly among minoritized youth (Rahm et al, 2005). Concurrently, the burgeoning “maker movement” has the potential to break down longstanding barriers to learning in STEM. However, there is a lack of research in teasing out the kinds of pathways youth traverse as they engage in STEM. The field also lacks understanding in the nature of dialogic interactions between youth and adult facilitators/teachers that can in/directly influence youths’ STEM pathways.

Our study setting is an informal maker/engineering program that meets weekly (75-min) at a community youth center. Research questions are:
1. What are the kinds of interactions/negotiations that youth and adult facilitators engage in?
2. How do youth and adult facilitator interactions/negotiations shape the actions youth subsequently take with their Making activities? How do these actions matter in the pathways youth are exploring as community makers/engineers?

Theoretical perspective
Non-commodified knowledge (ncK) refers to aspects of youths’ real-time experiences and face-to-face relationships that are local, non-economical, and grounded in their community and intergenerational culture (Bowers, 2003), as opposed to standardized, “one-size-fits-all” approaches that marginalize youth. Tan and Faircloth (2013) proposed an ncK framework that reconsiders three focal elements of the learning process --What the Learner Brings (identities, resources), What the Learner Does (practices, negotiations with instructor, resistance), and What Counts as Learning (artifacts, evidence of learning). We also draw from an expansive learning framework (Engeström & Sannino, 2010) that focuses on both the vertical (science or school-based) and horizontal (everyday experiences) elements pertinent to deep learning (Gutierrez & Vossoughi, 2010).

Methodology
We engaged in longitudinal critical ethnography (Madison, 2010) which privileges multiple perspectives, foregrounds dialogic interactions between researchers/stakeholders and allows for critique of potentially oppressive relationships. This approach was important as we attempted to make sense of how minoritized youth negotiate the norms and particular ways of being in a learning space, as they engage in STEM/Making activities. Data sources include rich field notes, interviews and youth-produced artifacts.

Findings
Two youth case studies will be presented, drawing from data across one academic school year and a 10-day summer program. We trace youths’ participation through time and activities (e.g. innovating a green light-up pen with Peltier tiles) to identify the salient nodes of interaction between facilitator and youth. We discuss how particular interaction patterns precipitated particular responses from youth and conjecture the plausible impacts such negotiations and resultant responses had on youths’ innovations and their emerging identity work and agency as youth makers/engineers. We then engage in teacher/facilitator reflection on the learning environment and pedagogical implications of such interactions.

Authors

• Edna Tan, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

• Faith Brown Freeman, University of North Carolina - Greensboro