Our video showcases how, through engaging historically marginalized youth in community ethnography as part of their making process, youth engaged in sustained STEM-rich making towards making a difference in their communities. In the video we take up two questions:
1) What is community ethnography as pedagogy and what roles does it play in supporting youth in the co-construction of new making practices and positions? 2) How does community ethnography support making space educators and researchers in learning more about youth concerns and desires for making and the cultural practices they bring to making?
We illustrate how we sought to help position youth as insider experts, with access to and who are co-owners of collective community wisdom for not only framing making, but also for potentially disrupting the systems of inequalities they experience. Community ethnography as pedagogy can also broaden who stakeholders are in their making process.
Taking a critical justice view of equity and paying attention to intersectionality of youths' identities, we suggest that community ethnography as pedagogy supports youth-making in equitable and consequential ways. We found that engaging youth in community ethnography (through teaching youth how to create surveys and conduct interviews with community members to collectively figure out what kinds of innovations may help the community) was especially empowering.
Specifically, youth author their own opportunities in engage in STEM-rich making by identifying issues from their different vantage points salient to them, and how they wish to address these problems in ways that felt safe and productive.
Science, Engineering, Informal Learning
Michigan State, UNC Greensboro
Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL)
Related Content for Equitable & Consequential Making through community ethnograp
Discussion from the 2018 STEM for All Video Showcase (15 posts)
Kelsey Lipsitz
Facilitator
May 14, 2018 | 12:41 p.m.
What a wonderful video and project -- you can see the passion these students have about their projects. I can see how these experiences would be really powerful for students. How do the teachers facilitate the ideas for STEM-rich making projects and do they run into any challenges while supporting students as they build/design? Also, I'm curious to know how your team is measuring the impact of community ethnography on students' making practices and positions?
Edna Tan
Lead Presenter Associate Professor
May 15, 2018 | 10:17 a.m.
Hi Kelsey,
Thank you for your kind comment! The community ethnography drives both the making process and what gets made. Adult-facilitators in the program are mindful to cede agency to the youth as much as possible. One way we do that is inviting adults from the youths' communities, who are insiders more than the adult-facilitators, to join in discussions or to give feedback to the youths' making process and design-features. As to how we are measuring the impact of CE, we're tracking (more than measuring) how specific pieces of feedback given by particular community members inform particular action-moves of the youth-makers, and what community-related data youth invoke when they explain the how, what, why and for-whom of their projects.
1
Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available
Thanks for sharing your work through this video! I'm very interested in your focus on equitable and consequential making — and loved the examples that the young people shared. Can you talk a little bit more about how you (or may it's the young people themselves?) are defining "consequential"? Thank you!
1
Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available
Found helpful:
Rebecca Teasdale
Angela Calabrese Barton
Co-Presenter Professor
May 15, 2018 | 11:40 a.m.
Hi Rebecca: Thank you for your comments! By consequential we suggest that making opportunities leverage upon advancing STEM learning and participation towards transformative outcomes aimed at addressing systemic inequalities, such as supporting youth agency to make in ways that matter to them and their communities while also disrupting power dynamics in STEM and in making. Other transformative outcomes include expanding youth’s social networks for making, in ways that promote greater inclusivity through engaging with a wider range of stakeholders (e.g., peers, families, community, STEM experts), and viewing making as happening across scales of activity – such as how making involves local projects that project new discourses onto the field. Hope this helps! Angie
Thanks, Angie! This is very helpful. I'm very interested in this idea of consequential making because I am finding something similar in research I'm conducting with adult makers in a public library context. As you well know, the discourse about making and learning often focuses on the STEM pipeline and global competitiveness, prompting the ongoing questions around "to what ends?" I'm finding evidence of adults (particularly women) directing their making and learning toward economic survival and thriving and toward nurturing social and community relationships. Your notions of consequentiality and equity are very relevant to the work that I am doing as well. I appreciate your sharing!
Andee Rubin
Facilitator Senior Scientist
May 15, 2018 | 02:04 p.m.
Thank you for introducing some very important terms to the discussion around making. "Consequential" is one of my favorite words as well - I like to use it to refer to the math that is embedded in making, as well as the making itself. I'm particularly intrigued by your notion of community ethnography, especially as it overlaps with my interest in data (and consequential uses of data). Can you describe the process a bit more? How do students decide how to collect data? How do they decide they have "enough" data to have identified a problem that is worth solving? P.S. I love the video of your makers presenting at AERA - something they'll remember for the rest of their lives!
1
Discussion is closed. Upvoting is no longer available
Found helpful:
Billy Spitzer
Edna Tan
Lead Presenter Associate Professor
May 17, 2018 | 09:04 a.m.
Hi Andee,
Thank you for your comments and for viewing our video. The community ethnography process is fluid and progresses differently with different group of youth. Typically we talk as a whole group about what issue is salient and what kinds of questions to ask the community about it. So for example when we were exploring how to build different kinds of toys in the making space, we also discussed the access to toys in the community. The youth came up with a few questions (usually between 3 to 5) for the first survey activity and then we look at the data together as a big group. Sometimes youth share their videos of their interviews and we unpack that together, sometimes youth report out and everyone chimes in. They then use that data to decide on what to make (different kinds of toys) and they dialogue again with community members about that decision and get feedback, in an iterative process. As to how much data is "enough", from our experience it has been a combination of the youth-makers and community members coming to some consensus about the design or youth-makers themselves arriving at a vision of what they can do, informed by community feedback. Of course, time plays a part too, but in these settings we have the luxury of more flexibility.
Great project. I love that you are taking an equity perspective within the maker community. Given the history of making, providing access is key. The consequential aspect an especially rich notion. How can making have an impact in academic, community, and personal spaces? That's a lovely challenge.
In the UTeach Maker program, we focus primarily on classroom-centric making experience. We have equity and access as one of the key features that our students must address in their Maker Showcase. We are building up a library of resources for them an we would love any suggested readings or resources you might suggest in this area.
I would also appreciate if your team could take a look at our program and offer suggestions. We are fairly new and always looking for additional insight.
Edna Tan
Lead Presenter Associate Professor
May 17, 2018 | 09:06 a.m.
Hi Shelly,
Thank you for visiting our video and for your comments. We're heading over to check out your video!
Edna & Angie
Erica Halverson
Facilitator Professor
May 16, 2018 | 09:48 a.m.
Hi Angie & Edna - thank you for sharing your insights about your project! I appreciated the careful description about what you mean by making and the examples of the kinds of making projects involved in the maker space. I thought of a couple of questions while watching the video"
1) Where are you doing the work? Is this a school-based partnership - are in several schools or focused on a single school? Who are the students involved? How do they choose to participate in the project?
2) I also wondered, with Andree Rubin (above), about the role of community ethnography in the work. Will this method be used to determine which projects students will do? Are you thinking about using ethnography for measuring the quality of products or the impact of the process?
One more thing - can you include your names & titles in the video? :-)
- Erica
Edna Tan
Lead Presenter Associate Professor
May 17, 2018 | 08:55 a.m.
Hi Erica,
Thank you for your comments and viewing the video! Answers to your questions:
1. This particular project is with community organizations - at NC we partner with one of the Boys and Girls club and a refugee community center; at MI we partner with a Boys and Girls club and a community science museum that has a youth-designed makerspace with open access to youth in the neighborhood (science museum entry fees waived). So we are in 4 community spaces with this project. Youth choose to participate voluntarily. In at least 2 of the sites we have been there for years so the program is regarded as a long-term club-program now. Many siblings of youth join as a result. Community staff members recommend youth to us. The program has showcases throughout the year at the club spaces so other youth can see what is going on and some decide to join the program.
2. Community ethnography largely drives what making projects youth will take on. We do come to the table with a few themes to jump-start discussions with the youth before they figure out if there is "traction" so to speak. Sometimes the youth bring up projects they want to do. They will change directions, or winnow to something specific. For example, a group of youth asked if they could learn to build apps. We discussed why, what and for whom to build the apps, which youth figured out through community ethnography. Through interviewing different peers at the club (about 200 attend daily), very different needs and wishes were solicited, and the youth then talked as a large group and with their partners about what kind of app they would build, for whom and why. One youth made an anti-bullying app (featured in the video) and his focus was anonymity of the informer, because of the 2 long interviews he conducted about subsequent bullying that occurs when one is caught being a "snitch." Another group of girls made a dance app with different dance routines for ballet, hip hop and stretching specifically for the group of kids at their club who are involved in cheerleading and dance.
As far as "measuring", I think we do trace the impact in terms of directionality, nuts and bolts of the project - why youth made particular decisions, used particular resources, etc, that are informed by or continue to be facilitated by community ethnography. At another grain size, we are interested in seeing how youths' making practices change/evolve as they become adapt at community ethnography, and the impact of that on the evolving making culture in these spaces.
This is awesome! My research team has also had students of a similar age work on an anti-bullying unit with Making this semester. What were some of the other projects (aside from the app seen in this video) that students worked on? Thanks!
Edna Tan
Lead Presenter Associate Professor
May 21, 2018 | 08:08 a.m.
Hi Janessa,
Here are some other examples: The youth have built toys for children of different age groups at their community, some examples include a three-storey doll house with paper circuit lighting, 3D printed fidget spinners, automatons, and a big geodesic playdome. They also created stop-motion movies with characters that they were themselves made/built in the space. Thanks!
Kelsey Lipsitz
What a wonderful video and project -- you can see the passion these students have about their projects. I can see how these experiences would be really powerful for students. How do the teachers facilitate the ideas for STEM-rich making projects and do they run into any challenges while supporting students as they build/design? Also, I'm curious to know how your team is measuring the impact of community ethnography on students' making practices and positions?
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Hi Kelsey,
Thank you for your kind comment! The community ethnography drives both the making process and what gets made. Adult-facilitators in the program are mindful to cede agency to the youth as much as possible. One way we do that is inviting adults from the youths' communities, who are insiders more than the adult-facilitators, to join in discussions or to give feedback to the youths' making process and design-features. As to how we are measuring the impact of CE, we're tracking (more than measuring) how specific pieces of feedback given by particular community members inform particular action-moves of the youth-makers, and what community-related data youth invoke when they explain the how, what, why and for-whom of their projects.
Kelsey Lipsitz
Rebecca Teasdale
Thanks for sharing your work through this video! I'm very interested in your focus on equitable and consequential making — and loved the examples that the young people shared. Can you talk a little bit more about how you (or may it's the young people themselves?) are defining "consequential"? Thank you!
Rebecca Teasdale
Angela Calabrese Barton
Professor
Hi Rebecca: Thank you for your comments! By consequential we suggest that making opportunities leverage upon advancing STEM learning and participation towards transformative outcomes aimed at addressing systemic inequalities, such as supporting youth agency to make in ways that matter to them and their communities while also disrupting power dynamics in STEM and in making. Other transformative outcomes include expanding youth’s social networks for making, in ways that promote greater inclusivity through engaging with a wider range of stakeholders (e.g., peers, families, community, STEM experts), and viewing making as happening across scales of activity – such as how making involves local projects that project new discourses onto the field. Hope this helps! Angie
Rebecca Teasdale
Thanks, Angie! This is very helpful. I'm very interested in this idea of consequential making because I am finding something similar in research I'm conducting with adult makers in a public library context. As you well know, the discourse about making and learning often focuses on the STEM pipeline and global competitiveness, prompting the ongoing questions around "to what ends?" I'm finding evidence of adults (particularly women) directing their making and learning toward economic survival and thriving and toward nurturing social and community relationships. Your notions of consequentiality and equity are very relevant to the work that I am doing as well. I appreciate your sharing!
Andee Rubin
Senior Scientist
Thank you for introducing some very important terms to the discussion around making. "Consequential" is one of my favorite words as well - I like to use it to refer to the math that is embedded in making, as well as the making itself. I'm particularly intrigued by your notion of community ethnography, especially as it overlaps with my interest in data (and consequential uses of data). Can you describe the process a bit more? How do students decide how to collect data? How do they decide they have "enough" data to have identified a problem that is worth solving? P.S. I love the video of your makers presenting at AERA - something they'll remember for the rest of their lives!
Billy Spitzer
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Hi Andee,
Thank you for your comments and for viewing our video. The community ethnography process is fluid and progresses differently with different group of youth. Typically we talk as a whole group about what issue is salient and what kinds of questions to ask the community about it. So for example when we were exploring how to build different kinds of toys in the making space, we also discussed the access to toys in the community. The youth came up with a few questions (usually between 3 to 5) for the first survey activity and then we look at the data together as a big group. Sometimes youth share their videos of their interviews and we unpack that together, sometimes youth report out and everyone chimes in. They then use that data to decide on what to make (different kinds of toys) and they dialogue again with community members about that decision and get feedback, in an iterative process. As to how much data is "enough", from our experience it has been a combination of the youth-makers and community members coming to some consensus about the design or youth-makers themselves arriving at a vision of what they can do, informed by community feedback. Of course, time plays a part too, but in these settings we have the luxury of more flexibility.
Hope that helps!
Edna & Angie
Shelly Rodriguez
Great project. I love that you are taking an equity perspective within the maker community. Given the history of making, providing access is key. The consequential aspect an especially rich notion. How can making have an impact in academic, community, and personal spaces? That's a lovely challenge.
In the UTeach Maker program, we focus primarily on classroom-centric making experience. We have equity and access as one of the key features that our students must address in their Maker Showcase. We are building up a library of resources for them an we would love any suggested readings or resources you might suggest in this area.
I would also appreciate if your team could take a look at our program and offer suggestions. We are fairly new and always looking for additional insight.
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Hi Shelly,
Thank you for visiting our video and for your comments. We're heading over to check out your video!
Edna & Angie
Erica Halverson
Professor
Hi Angie & Edna - thank you for sharing your insights about your project! I appreciated the careful description about what you mean by making and the examples of the kinds of making projects involved in the maker space. I thought of a couple of questions while watching the video"
1) Where are you doing the work? Is this a school-based partnership - are in several schools or focused on a single school? Who are the students involved? How do they choose to participate in the project?
2) I also wondered, with Andree Rubin (above), about the role of community ethnography in the work. Will this method be used to determine which projects students will do? Are you thinking about using ethnography for measuring the quality of products or the impact of the process?
One more thing - can you include your names & titles in the video? :-)
- Erica
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Hi Erica,
Thank you for your comments and viewing the video! Answers to your questions:
1. This particular project is with community organizations - at NC we partner with one of the Boys and Girls club and a refugee community center; at MI we partner with a Boys and Girls club and a community science museum that has a youth-designed makerspace with open access to youth in the neighborhood (science museum entry fees waived). So we are in 4 community spaces with this project. Youth choose to participate voluntarily. In at least 2 of the sites we have been there for years so the program is regarded as a long-term club-program now. Many siblings of youth join as a result. Community staff members recommend youth to us. The program has showcases throughout the year at the club spaces so other youth can see what is going on and some decide to join the program.
2. Community ethnography largely drives what making projects youth will take on. We do come to the table with a few themes to jump-start discussions with the youth before they figure out if there is "traction" so to speak. Sometimes the youth bring up projects they want to do. They will change directions, or winnow to something specific. For example, a group of youth asked if they could learn to build apps. We discussed why, what and for whom to build the apps, which youth figured out through community ethnography. Through interviewing different peers at the club (about 200 attend daily), very different needs and wishes were solicited, and the youth then talked as a large group and with their partners about what kind of app they would build, for whom and why. One youth made an anti-bullying app (featured in the video) and his focus was anonymity of the informer, because of the 2 long interviews he conducted about subsequent bullying that occurs when one is caught being a "snitch." Another group of girls made a dance app with different dance routines for ballet, hip hop and stretching specifically for the group of kids at their club who are involved in cheerleading and dance.
As far as "measuring", I think we do trace the impact in terms of directionality, nuts and bolts of the project - why youth made particular decisions, used particular resources, etc, that are informed by or continue to be facilitated by community ethnography. At another grain size, we are interested in seeing how youths' making practices change/evolve as they become adapt at community ethnography, and the impact of that on the evolving making culture in these spaces.
Thanks again for your questions!
Edna & Angie
Maureen Callanan
Great video and great project! Very powerful that you combine the ideas of equitable and consequential. Thank you for sharing your project!
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Thanks Maureen!
Janessa Doucette
This is awesome! My research team has also had students of a similar age work on an anti-bullying unit with Making this semester. What were some of the other projects (aside from the app seen in this video) that students worked on? Thanks!
Edna Tan
Associate Professor
Hi Janessa,
Here are some other examples: The youth have built toys for children of different age groups at their community, some examples include a three-storey doll house with paper circuit lighting, 3D printed fidget spinners, automatons, and a big geodesic playdome. They also created stop-motion movies with characters that they were themselves made/built in the space. Thanks!
Edna
Further posting is closed as the event has ended.