The Maker Movement the last chance of pr

The Maker Movement: the last chance of progressive education? Paulo Blikstein & Marcelo Worsley “highlighting the importance of externalizing one’s knowledge into concrete, shareable objects”

“Construction that takes place ‘in the head’ often happens especially felicitously when it is supported by construction of a more public sort ‘in the world’ – a sand castle or a cake, a Lego house or a corporation, a computer program, a poem, or a theory of the universe. Part of what I mean by ‘in the world’ is that the product can be shown, discussed, examined, probed, and admired […] It attaches special importance to the role of constructions in the world as a support for those in the head, thereby becoming less of a purely mentalist doctrine.” (Papert, 1980, p. 142).

—> The externalization of ideas is common to the Maker Movement and also to the new generation of ed-tech which seeks to more rigorously control students within scripted curriculum. This raises the stakes of doing it right. **     —> Also rules out romantic views of human nature which emphasize possibility, nondeterminism** Maker movement is under-theorized (I don’t think a strong argument is made for this approach as opposed to others… maybe it’s taken as a given) Maker is anti-intellectual

“Maker movement” is inconsistently capitalized… is this intentional?

**“Four cultural roots” Only thee are immediately listed… Generally, this paragraph would benefit from stronger transitions. Concluding sentence too dramatic     ** “Hacker culture” could use more citations. What about “What the Doormouse said”? **Claim: Despite this romantic portrait, and the incredible contributions of hackers to science and technology, this “sink-or-swim” culture does not work for the wide majority of students who are not part of this small elite. **     —> Is this substantiated? On flashy stuff at the Maker Faire—there’s nothing to do.

“This also downgrades and devalues projects such as traditional crafts, costumes, pottery, technology-augmented wearables and jewelry, among many others, as examined elsewhere”       —> A pretty heterogeneous list… what’s the point?

“science museums need to move visitors quickly”       —> Change of perspective too fast

deeply integrated into the school day” YES!

research vs. gut feeling (a confusion of assessment purposes and audiences)

“Furthermore, given the current importance of high stakes testing, one can scarcely afford to completely overlook learning, and simply trust “gut instinct.””      —> Infelicitous use of ‘learning’ here

“We know that women, African Americans, and Latinos have been historically excluded from technical professions, so bringing them into a makerspace without the proper facilitation and onboarding will likely result in the confirmation of their initial suspicion that “they are not technology people.””      —> BUT activation of prior knowledge; these are often precisely the people who have done construction, repaired machines, etc. Which experiences we allow into schools and privilege.

“When corporations enter the debate, they should be careful to understand what schools and teachers actually do, and learn how to speak a language that is mindful of the differences between the two agendas.”       —> Education and the cult of efficiency on communication between business and schools

“Rather than more equipment funding, what is increasingly setting those affluent schools apart is their freedom to experiment with more advanced, project-based pedagogies, rethink the curriculum (and deviate from it,) promote interdisciplinary projects, and provide proper facilitation and support.”      —> Is this substantiated?