Making is a movement present in the United States which fosters creativity and invention through the creation and sharing of products. This case study of one Western Pennsylvania school district’s integration of Making into its lower and upper secondary schools shows how the investment in space and equipment, guided by visionary leadership, can bring about innovation. Our findings after year 1 of this 2-year project indicate that Elizabeth Forward School District has been successful in fostering an atmosphere where students and teachers are given permission to fail, thereby allowing for experimentation, exploration, and the integration of girls into this normally male-dominated field.
BliksteinP. (2013). Digital fabrication and ‘making’ in education: The democratization of invention. In Walter-HerrmannJ.BüchingC. (Eds.), FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript-Verlag.
2.
BliksteinP.WorsleyM. (2016). Children are not hackers: Building a culture of powerful ideas, deep learning, and equity in the Maker movement. In PepplerK.HalversonE.KafaiY. (Eds.), Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (Vol.1, pp. 64–79). New York, NY: Routledge.
3.
DeweyJ. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago.
GrossmanJ. M.PorcheM. V. (2014). Perceived gender and racial/ethnic barriers to STEM success. Urban Education, 49, 698–727.
7.
HalversonE.SheridanK. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84, 495–505.
8.
HartleyJ. (1994). Case studies in organizational research. In CassellC.SymonG. (Eds.), Qualitative methods in organizational research, a practical guide (pp. 208-229). London, England: SAGE.
9.
HatchM. (2014). The maker manifesto. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
10.
HillC.CorbettC.St. RoseA. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women.
11.
JoplinL. (1981). On defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 4, 17–20.
12.
KafaiY.FieldsD.SearleK. (2014). Electronic textiles as disruptive designs: Supporting and challenging maker activities in schools. Harvard Educational Review, 844, 532–556.
MartinL. (2015). The promise of the Maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-college Engineering Education Research, 5, 4.
15.
MartinezS.StagerG. (2013). Invent to learn: Making, tinkering, and engineering in the classroom. Torrance, CA: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
16.
MerriamS. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17.
MikhakB.LyonC.GortonT.GershenfeldN.McEnnisC.TaylorJ. (2002, December1-2). Fab Lab: An alternate model of ICT for development. Paper presented at the 2nd international conference on open collaborative design for sustainable innovation (pp. 1–7), Bangalore, India. Bangalore, India: ThinkCycle.
18.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19.
MilgramD. (2011). How to recruit women and girls to the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) classroom. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 71, 4–11.
20.
PapertS. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: BasicBooks.
YinR. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). London, England: SAGE.
30.
ZollarsJ. T. (2018). Flow theory and engagement: Observing engagement through the lens of flow in a middle school integrated maker space (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh. Retrieved from http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/33700.
