When Words and Objects Collide: Exploring Equity in a Poetry Makerspace

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

Abstract

Makerspaces, heralded for their ability to encourage creativity, and innovation (Honey & Kanter, 2013), have been popping up across the country (Thomson, 2014; Stewart, 2014). One of the tenets that is driving the expansion of the maker movement is the notion that makerspaces are egalitarian places that foster STEM learning. However, there has been little research to show makerspaces are able to be egalitarian spaces of learning (Calabrese Barton, Tan, & Greenberg, 2016). Critique of the maker movement has revealed a focus on wealthy white males who create tech forward projects (Buechley, 2013; Brahms, 2014), leading to a perceived gender, race, and class divide of who is privileged to be a maker and what is entitled to be a maker project. As makerspaces enter more classrooms, libraries, and community spaces it is important to understand how non-typical makers interact and experience these places in order to build more inclusive makerspaces. This study explores what are the qualities of the environment and the interactions in a makerspaces that enable non-traditional makers to feel welcomed, engaged, and creative.

We examines a pop-up makerspace that was part of a weeklong poetry retreat in upstate New York. Through daily memos, interviews, and photographs of completed projects we triangulate on the experiences in this makerspace. We focus on 3 cases of makers: Sarah, Natasha, and Celeste. Sarah, in her late 20’s and of Middle Eastern descent, came to the retreat with an MFA in poetry and several published poems. Natasha a Latina in her late 20s was a recent graduate of a BA program, with a major in poetry. Celeste a White female in her middle 20’s attended the retreat in her 2nd year of a 2-year MFA program.

From the artifacts created and the experiences of these makers, we see the importance in designing a space that fosters openness, non-judgement, and a freedom to fail. Openness, as one participant explains is “the magic of the space...that there are no instructions and that forces you to make your own decisions.” Openness was not just that there were no specific projects to complete but that there was no timeline to complete a project by. Non-judgment, is the importance of being able to ask her same questions about electricity over and over again without ever feeling dumb, or feeling that the maker mentor was tired of explaining. Freedom to fail in the makerspace, came for Celeste in not having her identity tied to visual arts allowing her to feel safe to fail in a space not tied to words. Being able to fail and return to try again was vital to Sarah completing her project. In frustration after declaring “I fail at science” Sarah left the space one evening only to return the next day to ask more questions and to create a circuit that functioned. In providing a space that is open, non-judgmental, and safe to fail in that the poets created projects participants were proud of with several poets taking their projects home to share with family.

Authors

• Emma Anderson, University of Pennsylvania

• Dorothea Lasky, University of Pennsylvania

• Susan A. Yoon, University of Pennsylvania