Special Issue "The Future of the Maker Movement"

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050). This special issue belongs to the section "Sustainable Education and Approaches".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 October 2021.

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Kylie Peppler
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Informatics / School of Education, University of California, Irvine 92521, USA
Interests: educational innovation; educational technology; maker culture; teaching and learning; arts and computational media; computer science education; creativity; scalability and sustainability in education; learning sciences; computer-supported collaborative learning; out-of-school learning

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

It has been over 15 years since the initial launch of the modern-day maker movement, and much has happened! We have seen a rise of interest in DIY culture, new commercial markets have opened, new makerspaces have launched nationally and internationally in schools, libraries, museums, homes and community centers, and a large number of scholarly publications have investigated these new learning contexts. Much of the success of the maker movement came from the incorporation of dazzling new tools and technologies alongside low-tech tools and forms of making, which has invited broader participation and forged strong ties to the arts and crafts movement. Alongside the rise of the maker movement, we have also seen a revival of the CS4All movement as well as a broader push for the inclusion of STEM in the curriculum, which has quickly been taken up within the movement.

On the 15th anniversary of the maker movement, this Special Issue aims to cover all aspects of the future of the maker movement, such as the future of makerspaces, engineering education, arts education, design thinking, environmental education, activism, computer science education, scalability and sustainability in education, among others. Our main goal is to bring ideas about the challenges and begin to illuminate provocative directions for the future of this powerful movement. Particularly, as the commercial aspects of the maker movement fade, how does the field of making and learning expand, rather than contract? Further, how do we reclaim making as a culturally, socially, and historically inscribed mode of participatory learning?

Prof. Kylie Peppler
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • Out-of-school learning
  • Scalability and sustainability in education
  • Learning sciences
  • Learning analytics
  • Constructionism
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Economic development
  • Equity
  • Gender
  • Globalization
  • Makerspaces
  • Maker culture
  • Engineering education
  • Artseducation
  • STEM and STEAM
  • Computer science education
  • Human-centered design
  • Schools
  • Design thinking
  • Environmental education
  • Activism and education
  • Higher education

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Article
The Women* Who Made It: Experiences from Being a Woman* at a Maker Festival
Sustainability 2021, 13(16), 9361; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169361 - 20 Aug 2021
Viewed by 229
Abstract
This paper examines the profile of 10 women* makers attending Schmiede, a 10-day maker festival, which is unique not least due to its almost equal gender distribution. Drawing on interviews with women* attendees, we describe general struggles in fitting in the culture of [...] Read more.
This paper examines the profile of 10 women* makers attending Schmiede, a 10-day maker festival, which is unique not least due to its almost equal gender distribution. Drawing on interviews with women* attendees, we describe general struggles in fitting in the culture of spaces for making, the role of mentorship in childhood and adulthood, motivations and different approaches for engaging in making, limiting factors in (art-)making, and the consequences of sexism for making practice. We then discuss the characteristics of these women* makers in relation to existing literature about the culture in maker spaces and festivals and conclude by highlighting characteristics of the observed festival that may have resulted in more inclusive access for women* and other underrepresented groups. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Future of the Maker Movement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Making with Shenzhen (Characteristics)—Strategy and Everyday Tactics in a City’s Creative Turn
Sustainability 2021, 13(9), 4923; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094923 - 28 Apr 2021
Viewed by 351
Abstract
This paper investigates the government-led maker movement in Shenzhen, China by deploying Michel de Certeau’s concepts of “strategy” and “tactics”. While there is a growing body of literature surrounding the maker movement, the discrepancy between the maker movement presented in urban policies and [...] Read more.
This paper investigates the government-led maker movement in Shenzhen, China by deploying Michel de Certeau’s concepts of “strategy” and “tactics”. While there is a growing body of literature surrounding the maker movement, the discrepancy between the maker movement presented in urban policies and its participants’ actual practices is underexplored. Situating the exploration in the Chinese context, this article looks into how state intervention shapes the maker movement and actors’ participation. This work starts with considerations of political economy to demonstrate how the “Make with Shenzhen” campaign as a strategy fits into the government’s creative city agenda. It then draws upon the findings of a longitudinal ethnographic study to illuminate how discourses, institutions and apparatuses are tactically appropriated by individuals to mobilize symbolic, monetary, social and political resources to serve their interests. We argue that these tactical practices can potentially lead to meaningful changes in the city of Shenzhen and the everyday life of its people. By juxtaposing the strategy of the “Make with Shenzhen” campaign with the tactical practices surrounding it, this study offers insight into the challenges and possibilities brought about by the city-wide learning and making in the Chinese context. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Future of the Maker Movement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Student Development at the Boundaries: Makerspaces as Affordances for Engineering Students’ Development
Sustainability 2021, 13(6), 3058; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063058 - 11 Mar 2021
Viewed by 408
Abstract
University-based makerspaces are receiving increasing attention as promising innovations that may contribute to the development of future engineers. Using a theory of social boundary spaces, we investigated whether the diverse experiences offered at university-based makerspaces may contribute to students’ learning and development of [...] Read more.
University-based makerspaces are receiving increasing attention as promising innovations that may contribute to the development of future engineers. Using a theory of social boundary spaces, we investigated whether the diverse experiences offered at university-based makerspaces may contribute to students’ learning and development of various “soft” or “21st century” skills that go beyond engineering-specific content knowledge. Through interviews with undergraduate student users at two university-based makerspaces in the United States we identified seven different types of boundary spaces (where multiple communities, and the individuals and activities affiliated with those communities, come together). We identified students engaging in the processes of identification, reflection, and coordination, which allowed them to make sense of, and navigate, the various boundary spaces they encountered in the makerspaces. These processes provided students with opportunities to engage with, and learn from, individuals and practices affiliated with various communities and disciplines. These opportunities can lead to students’ development of necessary skills to creatively and collaboratively address interdisciplinary socio-scientific problems. We suggest that university-based makerspaces can offer important developmental experiences for a diverse body of students that may be challenging for a single university department, program, or course to offer. Based on these findings, we recommend university programs and faculty intentionally integrate makerspace activities into undergraduate curricula to support students’ development of skills, knowledge, and practices relevant for engineering as well as 21st century skills more broadly. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Future of the Maker Movement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop