Making Is in the Mindset: How a Makerspace Can Support At-Risk Youth

• In Event: 14.015 - Making Spaces for Youth From Nondominant Communities: New Approaches for Supporting Equitable and Consequential Experiences

Abstract

In this study, we describe how young adults learned and changed as a result of long-term engagement with a maker space in their post-foster care housing setting. Makerspaces are increasingly becoming part of schools and community organizations that serve underrepresented populations (Vossoughi & Bevan, 2014), but we are just beginning to understand how variables in the space, such as facilitators’ experience and the arrangement of tools and materials, can affect engagement and learning (Litts, 2015). Research suggests that developing a shared identity as a member of the community of practice (Nasir & Hand, 2008) or the opportunity to express their identities through their learning can be particularly beneficial to engagement (Barton et al., 20). Making literature conceives of different mindsets or dispositions one needs to be a maker (Chu et al., 2015; Ryan et al., 2016; Regalla, 2016). In this study, we use a concept of a “maker mindset” that draws primarily on Chu et al.’s (2015) theory of motivation and maker identity, but also focuses on the themes that emerged from our dataset and analyzed the role of context in relation to the motivational constructs: self-efficacy and persistence (Bandura, 1986); situational and individual interest (Hidi & Renninger, 2006); and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
We used Stake’s (1995) collective case study method to frame our qualitative research. Data was collected over the course of 6 months and included approximately 54 hours of observation in the makerspace as well as about 4 hours of periodic interviews with young adults. Our analyses address two main questions:
1. How have the young adults’ maker mindsets formed and changed during the study?
2. What relationship did the makerspace, housing program, and maker educators have to their mindset development?
Different narratives emerged concerning the relationship of context to each motivational theme. The case of Felicia, for example, illustrated how the makerspace’s variety of materials and tools, though inexpensive, could trigger situational interest during making sessions that would eventually flourish into an individual interest in painting and in continuing to explore other kinds of making. The case of Asa illustrated how facilitators could play a vital role in preventing her from throwing away projects or giving up when she might otherwise have been too frustrated to continue. The case of Clark illustrated how the culture of the makerspace and affiliated museum could promote entrepreneurial aims, extrinsically motivating him to explore other kinds of making when the kind of sculpting he was most interested in doing was too cost prohibitive to do in the makerspace. None of the three benefitted from the makerspace in quite the same way, nor did they experience similar growth or changes, but in all cases, the role of facilitators, the maker community, and the materials in the makerspace played unique and vital roles.

Authors

• Rachel Bonnette, University of Pittsburgh

• Kevin Crowley, University of Pittsburgh

• Peter Samuelson Wardrip, Children's Museum of Pittsburgh

• Lisa Brahms, Children's Museum of Pittsburgh