Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity
- The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Core Concepts of Lifespan Creativity Development
- Part II The Development of Creativity
- Part III Modes of Enhancement
- Part IV Environments and Contexts
- 18 Creative Identity Development in Classrooms
- 19 Creativity in Children’s Museums
- 20 Makers and Makerspaces
- 21 Organizations and Creativity
- 22 Creativity Development and Culture
- Part V Special Populations
- Index
- References
20 - Makers and Makerspaces
Developing Inventive Talent
from Part IV - Environments and Contexts
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 November 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity
- The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Core Concepts of Lifespan Creativity Development
- Part II The Development of Creativity
- Part III Modes of Enhancement
- Part IV Environments and Contexts
- 18 Creative Identity Development in Classrooms
- 19 Creativity in Children’s Museums
- 20 Makers and Makerspaces
- 21 Organizations and Creativity
- 22 Creativity Development and Culture
- Part V Special Populations
- Index
- References
Summary
Makerspaces and the Maker Movement provide a place and a pedagogy for the development of inventive talent. We describe the key components of Maker pedagogy, including tinkering, failing, sharing, and diversity of people and perspectives. The authors then provide a lifespan perspective on the development of inventive talent, from young Makers’ discovery of the tools and materials of making, to the adolescent learning and mentoring process, to the acquisition of expertise as an engineer, a designer, or developer.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity , pp. 442 - 459Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Bean, V., Farmer, N. M., & Kerr, B. A. (2015). An exploration of women’s engagement in Makerspaces. Gifted and Talented International, 30(1–2), 61–67. doi:10.1080/15332276.2015.1137456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, S. M., & Sator, A. J. (2015). Maker pedagogy and science teacher education. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 13(1), 60–87.Google Scholar
Byrne, D., & Davidson, C. (2015). Make schools: State of making report. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University Press.Google Scholar
Caballero-García, P. A., & Grau Fernandez, T. (2018). Makerspaces and scientific creativity level of middle school students. Global Journal of Arts Education, 8(2), 75–83. doi:10.18844/gjae.v8i2.3767Google Scholar
Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the creative achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 37–50. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, M. M., & Blikstein, P. (2018). Exploring problem-based learning for middle school design and engineering education in digital fabrication laboratories. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 12(2), 7.Google Scholar
Cipolla, C. (2019). Build it better: Tinkering in feminist maker pedagogy. Women’s Studies, 48(3), 261–282. doi:10.1080/00497878.2019.1593842Google Scholar
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., Croft, L., Baldus, C., & Ihrig, D. (2003). Young inventors. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.), The international handbook on innovation (pp. 281–292). Amsterdam: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/b978–008044198-6/50019-xGoogle Scholar
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., Kerr, B., Huesman, R., & Johnson, D. (2007, Sept.). Mechanical inventiveness: A three-phase study. The origins and development of high ability: Ciba Foundation Symposium 178 (pp. 160–174). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Colangelo, N., Kerr, B., Hallowell, K., Huesman, R., & Gaeth, J. (1992). The Iowa Inventiveness Inventory: Toward a measure of mechanical inventiveness. Creativity Research Journal, 5(2), 157–163. doi:10.1080/10400419209534429Google Scholar
Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 7(3), 11–14.Google Scholar
Farmer, N. M. (2018). Maker meaning: An exploration of the maker movement, career adaptability, and life satisfaction (Order No. 10811828). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global (2070378122). Retrieved from https://www2lib.ku.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.www2.lib.ku.edu/dissertations-theses/maker-meaning-exploration-movement-career/docview/2070378122/se-2?accountid-14556Google Scholar
Fasso, W., & Knight, B. A. (2020) Identity development in school makerspaces: Intentional design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(2), 275–294. doi:10.1007/s10798–019-09501-zGoogle Scholar
Flores, C. (2018). Problem-based science, a constructionist approach to science literacy in middle school. International Journal of Child–Computer Interaction, 16, 25–30. doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.11.001Google Scholar
Foster, C., Wigner, A., Lande, M., & Jordan, S. S. (2018). Learning from the parallel pathways of makers to broaden pathways to engineering. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 6. doi:10.1186/s40594–017-0098-8Google Scholar
Godhe, A. L., Lilja, P., & Selwyn, N. (2019). Making sense of making: Critical issues in the integration of maker education into schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3), 317–328. doi:10.1080/1475939x.2019.1610040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graven, M., Lerman, S., & Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(2), 185–194. doi:10.1023/A:1023947624004Google Scholar
Gunnarsdóttir, R. (2013). Innovation education: Defining the phenomenon. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of innovation education (pp. 47–58). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504. doi:10.17763/haer.84.4.34j1g68140382063Google Scholar
Hatch, M. (2013). The maker movement manifesto: Rules for innovation in the new world of crafters, hackers, and tinkerers. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.Google Scholar
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Jordan, S., & Lande, M. (2014, Oct.). Might young makers be the engineers of the future?. 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings (pp. 1–4). Madrid: IEEE.Google Scholar
Kafai, Y., Fields, D., & Searle, K. (2014). Electronic textiles as disruptive designs: Supporting and challenging maker activities in schools. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 532–556.Google Scholar
Kerr, B., & McKay, R. (2013). Searching for tomorrow’s innovators: Profiling creative adolescents. Creativity Research Journal, 25(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
Kerr, B., & Vuyk, M. A. (2013). Career development for creatively gifted students: What parents, teachers, and counselors need to know. In Kim, K. H., Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.), Creatively gifted students are not like other gifted students (pp. 137–151). Brill Sense. doi:10.1007/978-94-6209-149-8_10Google Scholar
Kim, K. H., Kaufman, J. C., Baer, J., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2013). Creatively gifted students are not like other gifted students: Research, theory, and practice. Brill Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkendall, E., & Kerr, B. A. (2013). Lawrence Creates Makerspace. LCM Newsletter, 1(1), 3–4.Google Scholar
Kivinen, O., & Ristela, P. (2003). From constructivism to a pragmatist conception of learning. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lande, M., Jordan, S. S., & Weiner, S. (2017). Making people and projects: Implications for designing making-based learning experiences [Paper presentation]. Pacific Southwest Section Meeting Conference, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
Lee, B., & Kim, H. (2019). Exploring the learning process of makerspace-based maker education in school. Journal of Educational Technology, 35(2), 159–192. doi:10.17232/kset.35.2.159Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, J., Woock, L., & Wright, M. (2008). Ready to innovate: Are educators and executives aligned on the creative readiness of the U.S. workforce? The Conference Board, Research Report, 1424, 1–7.Google Scholar
Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 1479–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, J., Wood, E., Chesworth, L., Nisha, B., Nutbrown, B., & Olney, B. (2019). Makerspaces in early childhood education: Principles of pedagogy and practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 26(3), 221–233. doi:10.1080/10749039.2019.1655651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, A. S. (2018). How making and maker spaces have contributed to diversity & inclusion in engineering: A [non-traditional] literature review [Paper presentation]. Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity Conference, Crystal City, VA.Google Scholar
Newcombe, N. S., & Huttenlocher, J. (2000). Learning, development, and conceptual change. Making Space: The Development of Spatial Representation and Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Oplinger, J., Lande, M., Jordan, S., & Camarena, L. (2016). Making leaders: Leadership characteristics of makers and engineers in the maker community. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 7(2), 65–82.Google Scholar
Ord, J. (2012). John Dewey and experiential learning: Developing the theory of youth work. Youth & Policy, 108(1), 55–72.Google Scholar
Reilly, D., Neumann, D. L., & Andrews, G. (2017). Gender differences in spatial ability: Implications for STEM education and approaches to reducing the gender gap for parents and educators. In Khine, M. (Ed.), Visual–spatial ability in STEM education (pp. 195–224). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44385-0_10Google Scholar
Sheridan, K. M., Halverson, E. R., Litts, B. K., Brahms, L., Jacobs-Priebe, L., & Owens, T. (2014). Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 505–531. doi:10.17763/haer.84.4.brr34733723j648uGoogle Scholar
Sjöberg, B. (2009). Design theory and design practice within Sloyd education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 28(1), 71–81. doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2009.01594.xGoogle Scholar
Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402. doi:10.1037/a0028446Google Scholar
Vongkulluksn, V. W., Matewos, A. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Marsh, J. A. (2018). Motivational factors in makerspaces: A mixed methods study of elementary school students’ situational interest, self-efficacy, and achievement emotions. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1). doi:10.1186/s40594–018-0129-0Google Scholar
Weiner, S. (2017). The new democratic innovators: Young makers and the future of user-centered innovation [Poster presentation]. 2017 Society for the Study of New and Emerging Technology (S.NET) Meeting, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
Weiner, S., Lande, M., & Jordan, S. (2018). The engineer of 2020, in the making: Understanding how young adults develop maker identities and the implications for education reform. International Journal of Engineering and Education, 34(2), 833–842.Google Scholar