Moving From Fluency to Fluidity: Traversing Representations in Engineering and Making

• In Event: Intersections of Equity, Engineering, and Literacy: Exploring Possible Presents, Building Possible Futures

Abstract

Purpose
Sketches, diagrams, notes, and more formal representations like those from computer-aided design that require precise measurements are all central to the work of engineers, designers, and makers. This poster discusses the ways in which makers create and traverse a range of representations, with different degrees of formality. We ask: How do makers create and use representations while engaging in processes of making and engineering, and how do representations contribute to their developing STEM literacies?

Theoretical Framework
Engineering is a multimodal activity (Johri, Roth, & Olds, 2013). Sketching, drawing, and other expressive media are critical objects for thinking and reflective-action in engineering (Ferguson, 1994). Prior work on representations in engineering has focused on the formalized conventional forms (Moore et al., 2013) through a “representational fluency” perspective (Nathan et al., 2002). That is, one’s ability to use a particular representational form (e.g., graphs), and relate that form to others (e.g., data tables, equations). We propose an cisc--representational fluidity--to describe how makers traverse representational forms with differing degrees of formality as they concurrently develop more formal engineering practices.

Methods and Data Sources
Data come from the Investigating STEM Literacies in Makerspaces projects, and include observations and interviews from 6-9 month observations in 3 sites: an adult makerspace, a youth informal “fablab”, and an engineering course in a high school making space. Data--fieldnotes, video, and artifacts--were coded with the STEM Literacy Practices framework (Authors, 2016), and all instances of the practice “representation” were selected and analyzed using a content analysis approach to yield themes (Charmaz, 2014). Themes were used to construct a cross-case analysis of representational fluidity in the three making contexts.

Results:
We present three central findings: (1) Experienced makers constantly traverse representations--both analog and digital--in all phases of their making. They create representations across a range of formalities--i.e., note taking, sketches, CAD drawings, and even markings on prototypes to imagine iterations.. The use of pen and paper, and the range in representational formality allow for rapid movement between them, and rapid progress on whatever problem they are addressing. This is in contrast to engineering firms, where drawings are formal records of design activities, signed off on by authority figures and entered into official records of work (Trevelyan, 2010). (2) Youth makers in an informal “FabLab” traverse primarily in digital representational spaces, using them to elicit support and to develop new design practices. Sketching played less of a central role, but was used to coordinate particular traversals, like the mapping of wires onto pins on an arduino, or measurements for designing a laser-cut chassis to house motors and electronics components. And, (3) Emphasizing sketching through the use of notebooks and clipboards supported students in school to develop sketching practices, which became points of entry into 3D modeling and fabrication processes.

Significance
Traversing representations is a means for developing both facility with those forms and STEM practices.. Understanding how youth develop representational fluidity works toward more equitable participation by recognizing and supporting a continuum between less formal and more formal representations.

Authors

• Brian E. Gravel, Tufts University

• Eli Tucker-Raymond, TERC

• Ada Ren, TERC

• Aditi Wagh, Tufts University