FabLearn 2015

Last weekend I attended and presented at the FabLearn 2015 Conference on Creativity and Fabrication in Education. The FabLearn conference focused on the maker movement, the theme was equity and diversity in making. Dr. Nichole Pinkard was the keynote speaker--as well as being an Associate Professor at DePaul University, she is considered a groundbreaking designer of digital and hybrid learning environments where she engages youth who has been marginalized from mainstream education. To read more about Nichole's work, check out  Digital Youth Networks. Her work bridges the theoretical understandings at ways we look at learning environments and design and a deep, pragmatic understanding of youth's lives.We spoke about introducing girls to the maker movement through e-textiles, primarily lilypad arduino (Buechley, 2006), a small microprocessor similar to the arduino, often seen in robotics. The conversation revolved around meaningful ways to engage girls in making; how to create an equitable environment for learning. We discussed whether e-textiles were an appropriate methodology of introducing circuitry, design and programming to girls. Overall, the design of the projects that I have seen in e-textiles seems simplistic, lacking aesthetic and design appeal. In introducing e-textiles, are not the design aspects of the projects of the project an integral part of the learning? Are e-textiles the most appropriate way to scaffold learning for girls about programming? Or is this the pinkification of the maker movement? Are we creating a further divide between the genders through the maker movement? Leah Buechley, in her wonderful and perhaps infamous keynote at FabLearn two years ago decried Make magazine for excluding girls--in an informal study she showed that meant were featured almost exclusively on the covers of Make magazine and projects that appeal predominately to boys, i.e. robotics were most often represented in the pages of Make.In the past two years, e-textiles has taken on a slightly more substantial role in the maker movement, but the question still remains, what are we trying to encourage girls to learn? Are we supporting them with enough design skills to engage in meaningful project based learning? When, we as educators design PBL, are we looking at the learning outcomes we want to achieve, or are e-textiles just the new buzzword in learning? There is a lack of meaningful e-textiles curriculum. and a lack of role models creating work in this area. Are we simply re-creating the home economics and industrials art classes of the 1960s, where students that were not traditionally academically oriented were encouraged to take? When I wanted to take "shop", I was told that those classes were first, just open to boys, and not recommended for students that were "academic".Lets make sure we are not re-creating these same gender divisions in the maker movement. Additionally the curriculum that develops around these activities need to be meaningful, both from an intellectual and making perspective.

Digital Literacy round 3

A new semester begins! As we begin to teach Digital Literacy for Designers for the third time, I want to focus on what we want the students to learn from this class. I also want to redefine my understanding of web/digital literacy. I was reading Chris Lawrence's (VP of learning at Mozilla) definition of web literacy. First, I want to note that web literacy and digital literacy in my view are synonymous. Mozilla begins by defining web literacy as the ability to read, write and participate on the web. As an educator, this is the core idea behind any type of literacy, the ability to read and write and participate in the world at large through these skills.
Reading, writing and basic arithmetic were the necessary literacies in the 20th century. Schools were established to teach the required skills, so that individuals could enter the work force and participate. As society and work become more complex, and we entered the information age, the skills to enter and compete in the workplace expanded. More complex skills, critical thinking, analytical skills and non-linear thinking began to emerge as important. The web has redefined the necessary skills to succeed in the workplace, and placed new demands on higher education. The ability to research digitally in one's discipline is now a mandatory skill. But how do students learn this? Is it an innate ability? Are they really digital natives as Prensky refers to this generation of learners? I have observed that almost all students lack digital literacy skills, although they may be very adept at the social and communication aspects of social media. That does not equate to being able to read and write the web. Understanding concepts of privacy & tracking, being able to critically assess sources on the web, navigating information overload are all skills most undergraduate do not possess. Just like reading, writing and arithmetic--the 3 R's of 20th Century education were taught, literacy in the digital age must also be taught. Lets work together to define digital literacy, and learn together.
 

Digital Literacy for Designers Class #1

The first day of the semester! Anxious to meet all the students and start the semester. Looking forward to re-framing the class using the design activism as a lens to look at digital literacy.Re-read Doug's Curate or Be Curated: Why Our Information Environment is Crucial to a Flourishing Democracy Civil Society. I think this will be an excellent first article to read together in class. The article highlights the importance of being aware that social networks are not neutral spaces. It is critical to understand who funds these networks? As with many sites, if you are getting something for free, are you really? Or is your information being used for profit? For the most part these sites are publicly traded corporations with boards and shareholders who are looking for returns on their investments. This is a similar situation with  LMSs (think Blackboard, WebCT, Desire2Learn), they are mostly owned by venture capitalist firms with profits to earn. Creating educational environments that really support learning is not their main mission. These LMSs and social networks help to silo information and curate what we do read. Google, Amazon all use algorithms to determine what should appears on our screen--what Eli Pariser calls the "filter bubble". It is becoming increasingly more important to draw our information from multiple sources, and understand who controls those sources. I want to explore the search engine DuckDuckGo--which does not track your history unlike Google. The importance of listening to many voices is a theme that we will focus on this semester.