VIPrioritizing Creativity & Soft-Skills in Museum Makerspaces

  • Ashley Chen, The George Washington University

Since the early 2010s, museums have been invested in the maker movement, which emphasizes learning-by-doing in interdisciplinary environments through creation with various tools and technologies. Many have focused on the maker movement as an extension of the STEM movement: through hands-on projects, maker-centered learning can increase engagement and proficiency in STEM subjects and prepare students for STEM careers. However, the strength of museum maker-programs lies in alignment with the STEAM movement – integration of the arts and design thinking that encourages development of creativity, empathy, and other soft skills necessary for human-centered problem solving. Historical context of STEM, STEAM, and maker movements will first be addressed to understand the educational motivations and guiding principles before looking at museums’ motivations and roles in these movements. Case studies at the Bata Shoe Museum and Children’s Creativity Museum will be presented that highlight two strategies used in successful, human-centered museum making experiences: de-centering technology and guided facilitation.

A Brief History of STEM in the U.S.

The STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education movement gained prominence in the U.S. at the turn of the twenty-first century after the publishing of several reports that showed U.S. students’ performance in STEM was falling behind other industrialized countries.1 In a global economy increasingly driven by science and technology sectors, STEM education and excellency was tied to ideas of national prosperity, global power, and influence. The STEM movement advocates “subjects cannot and should not be taught in isolation, just as they do not exist in isolation in the workforce."2 Since the early 2000s, the U.S. government has passed numerous initiatives to better prepare students for STEM careers, including acts that modify standardized testing and acts that increased federal funding toward STEM education and teacher training. Simultaneously, national resources were focused on STEM research, as well as economic policy aimed at growing the STEM industries.3

From STEM to STEAM

From 2000-2010, growth in STEM jobs in the U.S. was three times as fast as growth in non-STEM jobs.4 The U.S. Department of Commerce reported that STEM workers “drive our nation’s innovation and competitiveness by generating new ideas, new companies, and new industries.”5 However, concerns remain about the supply and availability of STEM workers. In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education reported that only 16% of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in a STEM career; additionally, only half of those who go on to pursue a college major in STEM choose to work in a related career.6

Many educators have turned to STEAM, which adds the A for Arts to the STEM acronym, as a solution to this retention problem, as well as a response to decreasing federal funding for the Arts. Research has shown numerous benefits of incorporating arts into K-12 education, including reduced boredom in school and better performance on standardized tests.7 More than just crafts or artistically decorating STEM projects, “integrating arts disciplines into curriculum and instruction in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics can be advantageous for generating new learning opportunities rooted in the process of hands-on design and production.”8 The STEM to STEAM movement was championed in 2010 by John Maeda and the Rhode Island School of Design, arguing that the integration of the arts teaches design thinking, flexibility, risk-taking, creativity, collaboration, and empathy – all essential skills for more well-rounded employees, innovation, and developing human-centered, creative solutions in the workplace during a time when automation is on the rise. 9

STEAM education has potential to keep students more engaged by humanizing and creating meaning around interdisciplinary learning and to appeal to a broader, more diverse group of students.10 In a 2018 study published by Microsoft, 91% of girls and young women describe themselves as creative and 72% say it’s important to have a job that directly helps the world; however, only 37% associate STEM jobs with being creative or making a difference in the world.11 STEAM learning can help reach this audience and bridge this gap between STEM subjects, creativity, and making the world a better place.12 This is crucial as creativity is commonly named as one of the most important skills to succeed in the 21st century. In a 2010 global IBM poll, more than 1,500 CEOs from 60 countries rated creativity as the “most crucial factor for future success,”13 and through analysis of LinkedIn data in 2018, LinkedIn Learning found that “creativity is the most important skill in the world.”14

The Maker Movement

The maker movement grew out of the push for STEM learning and increased accessibility of creative technology, and it is often in conversation with the STEAM movement. The maker movement refers to “an interest working with one’s hands in interdisciplinary environments that incorporate various tools and technologies.”15 It encompasses a “growing number of people who are engaged in the creative production of artifacts in their daily lives and who find physical and digital forums to share their processes and products with others."16 The maker movement gained momentum with the launch of Make magazine in 2005 and the Maker Faire in 2006. In 2013, Maker Media, Inc. was born and took over publishing of the bimonthly Make magazine in addition to publishing books, producing Maker Faires, and operating an online site that sells supplies for “making” projects.17 Maker Media emphasizes that making represents “the democratization of design, engineering, fabrication and education.”18 Common making projects include circuitry, robotics, 3D printing, and woodworking. Maker-centered education emphasizes “learning by doing” with a self-directed, informal, iterative, and collaborative approach.19 Because of the hands-on and interdisciplinary nature of many projects, “STEAM” and “making” are sometimes used interchangeably.

Similar to the discussion of benefits of STEAM, many supporters have advocated for maker-centered learning as a method of improving proficiency in STEM subjects,20 increasing interest in STEM professions, and ultimately impacting everything from the technology and manufacturing industries to the global economy.21 As the movement gained popularity, some have emphasized that the most beneficial maker programs are those that go beyond the technical skills and center the maker movement’s human aspect – how making is collaborative and core to human identity and expression, how it empowers individuals to build up from their existing knowledge and pursue what interests them, and how it fosters creativity and the idea that anyone can innovate for the benefit of the world.22 Matt Baker, who runs The Forge, the Science Museum of Virginia’s intergenerational makerspace for all ages, says they aim to help participants develop “persistence, collaboration, motivation … and all those softer skills that don’t get measured but that are just as important.”23 Maker Media promotes the purpose of incorporating making into education to be “fostering in each student the full capacity, creativity and confidence to become agents of change in their personal lives and in their community.”24

The maker movement is now a global phenomenon across formal and informal learning environments. Maker fairs are held all over the world each year, and makerspaces – spaces where makers can come to share ideas, skills, and tools – can be found in a range of environments including after-school programs, libraries, museums, and higher-education institutions. One example is FabLabs, created by professor Neil Gerschenfeld from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) as “pedagogical environments that would allow everyday people to solve their own problems by producing (rather than purchasing or outsourcing) the tools they need.”25 FabLabs emphasizes principles of engineering, robotics, and design, and models have been adopted for K-12 formal and informal learning settings worldwide. 26

Making in Museums

The early 2010s saw numerous museums and libraries merging with the maker movement, building dedicated makerspaces or incorporating maker-centered activities. Since 2011, the Institute of Museums and Library Services (IMLS) has invested over $10 million to advance research and support making in museums and libraries. In 2017, IMLS published Making & Learning with the Children’s Museum of Pittsburgh, a project to “build and sustain the capacity of libraries and museums to develop effective makerspaces and programs.”27 The National Science Foundation has also supported development and research of making in museums at institutions including the Exploratorium in 2013 and the New York Hall of Science in 2014. 28

The initial push was primarily in children’s or science museums, as these types of institutions have “long incorporated making and creative technologies in their galleries,” but the movement has reached all types of institutions, including art and history museums, and making activities and makerspaces have taken many forms.29 At the Peabody Essex Museum, the Maker Lounge hosted 3D printing workshops, individual tinkering for individuals of all ages with materials from circuits to cardboard saws, Maker-in-Residence programs, and varied demonstrations by visiting collaborators, including artists, scientists, and engineers.30 ARTLAB at the Hirshhorn Museum supports teen innovators through a one-on-one mentorship program with professional creatives in addition to providing free access to art materials and the latest technology.31 Some institutions, such as Spark!Lab at the National Museum of American History, design maker-activities to connect to the museum’s collections or municipal or national history. Spark!Lab is designed for children ages 6-12 and their families, and their STEAM activities incorporate themes that connect to the museum’s exhibitions and America’s history of innovation.32

Recognizing that interdisciplinary programs require multiple areas of expertise, museums often partner with external organizations to implement making programs. One such example is a collaborative STEAM program between the Innovation Hub at Florida State University, the Robert K. Godfrey Herbarium, and a local summer camp that took place in summer 2018. This program involved tours of the Herbarium and Innovation Hub and integrated arts, maker tech, museum specimen, and scientific research with the goal of showing “different ways creativity is involved in STEM.”33 Activities included learning about plant pressing, drawing scientific illustrations, and 3D modeling and printing of nature inspired tokens.

Desi Gonzalez places making with creative technologies in a “longer lineage of creation as a form of arts engagement in museums” and in a history of amateur art practice in the United States.34 Beginning with the 19th century, Gonzalez explains how museums supported creative production through formal art classes and academies. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, this declined as universities formed their own departments, new technology like broadcast media shifted arts and culture participation from creation to consumption, and American culture increasingly differentiated between popular and highbrow arts, resulting in reduced art practice and a widening gap between highly trained professionals and amateurs. Art museums, such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, shifted to collecting objects of “higher taste” and swapped their adult art-making classes for art-historical lectures, believing their role was to foster high taste and aesthetic appreciation in their audiences. Art making primarily remained in programming for children, where museum educators embraced self-directed and hands-on learning principles for youth.

Using hands-on STEAM programming and making activities is part of a shift away from the authoritative museum that operates under the banking model of education and towards participatory visitor engagement for all ages. As defined by Paulo Freire, the banking model of education places authority on the teacher, or the museum, and positions students, or visitors, as receptacles for the museum’s knowledge.35 Moving away from this model, opportunity for dialogue between teacher or facilitator is created, and the visitor becomes an active participant in their own learning instead of passively receiving information. The educational goal becomes “problem-posing” – emphasizing our relations with the world, thinking about our problems and how to solve them.36 This shift towards visitor participation in museums is also part of a broader participatory culture that has become widespread in the U.S. and worldwide in the last fifteen years, spurred by the Internet and new technologies. Described by Gonzalez, “In a participatory culture—as opposed to consumer culture—amateurs take the reins of the production of media and cultural artifacts… As the Internet increasingly provides easy access to tools and networks with which to contribute and distribute culture, everyone becomes a media maker.”37

In The Participatory Museum, Nina Simon argues that museums can use participatory techniques “to develop experiences that are more valuable and compelling for everyone.”38 Just as STEAM education benefits schools in ways like reducing student boredom and increasing student engagement with STEM learning, participating through making can benefit museums in many ways. Simon explores how participatory techniques can address several commonly expressed forms of public dissatisfaction with cultural and learning institutions. Two of these complaints are “the institution is not a creative place where I can express myself and contribute to history, science, and art” and “the institution is not a comfortable social place for me to talk about ideas with friends and strangers.”39 Making is a form of participation that addresses both. Providing opportunities for making supports the interests of visitors who prefer to make and do rather than just read or watch, and makerspaces emphasize collaboration and sharing of ideas.

As Gonzalez documented in 2015, “arts participation through amateur art practice is again on the rise in the United States, and subsequently museums are being reinvigorated as sites for art making for all ages and levels of professionalization.”40 Speaking to digitally mediated arts creation upon the opening of Media Lab at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2013, Don Undeen, the senior manager of the makerspace at the time, commented, “Digital tools do not fundamentally alter this paradigm, they just make it possible for more people to get involved.”41 Informal learning settings like museums play an “important role in diversifying the maker movement by making tools, materials, and processes more readily available to people who may not initially self-identify as makers.”42 STEAM programming and the maker movement was able to enter museums because of institutional history with arts creation, engagement with participatory culture, and alignment with maker culture in several areas: dedication to sharing information as freely as possible; belief in the value of hands-on, student-centered learning; and the notion that everyone is a maker, regardless of age, profession, or level of academic achievement.

Formal K-12 school settings face many challenges in creating STEAM programming and effective makerspaces, such as funding and resources, lack of time due to the focus on testing, and lack of teacher or facilitator training. Fern Shupeck, executive director of the Betty Brinn Children’s Museum, notes, “Schools are increasingly interested in maker education for all grade levels and in creating makerspaces, but many do not have the resources, training, and support they need to get started.”43 Informal learning settings like museums can help fill this gap. The Betty Brinn Museum hosts Teacher Studio, “a free, professional development series … that provides an introduction to resources, training, and activities for K-12 educators looking to implement making, makerspaces, and STEAM learning.”44 Jacqualine Grant and Delaney Patterson, leaders of a STEAM program at the Garth and Jerri Frehner Museum, acknowledge budget disparities in rural areas:

“Because arts programs in rural school districts such as ours are more impacted by budget than schools in affluent areas, access to arts and science educational opportunities through informal learning environments is extremely important. Through our program, over 6000 students have accessed arts and science resources their schools do not have, and at least 90 teachers have learned how to integrate arts into STEM lessons.”45

Some educators fear that attempts to institutionalize K-12 making through schools will suppress the creativity central to the maker movement by emphasizing the immediate math or science content and hard engineering and technology skills gained.46 Museums can combat this. For years, museums have been integrating digital technology to build connections, encourage dialogue, and engage visitors in storytelling, empathy, and change.47 This is important as museums continue to shift from focusing on the collections and exhibitions to focusing on the people and communities they serve. The most beneficial museum makerspaces and STEAM programs are not ones that have the highest attendance numbers or use the fanciest technology and teach the most challenging technical skills, but those that guide participants to have a human experience and utilize technology in deliberate ways to facilitate creativity, empathy, and cultural understanding. Two case studies, including a reflection on my former internship experience, will be presented that highlight different strategies used in successful, human-centered STEAM experiences: deliberate de-centering of the technology and guided facilitation.

Using 3D Fabrication Technologies for Creative Expression and Cultural Heritage Learning at the Bata Shoe Museum, Toronto

In 2015, the Bata Shoe Museum in Toronto developed a 3D printing workshop for children aged 9-13 titled “Footwear Futures” in collaboration with the Semaphore Research Cluster on Inclusive Design in Mobile and Pervasive Computing. The workshop was developed to allow researchers and the museum education staff to evaluate the use of 3D digital fabrication technologies for young learners in cultural heritage settings.48 Researchers saw a gap between a growing amount of discourse around the educational value of 3D technologies in museums and the strategies used to engage children with these technologies, especially in the setting of cultural programming.49 They sought to understand if 3D printing used in conjunction with museum pedagogical tools could support cultural heritage learning, cross-cultural understanding, and allow students to connect historical technology with contemporary ones. This is vital as successful STEAM learning experiences do not merely utilize advanced technology for its own sake; rather, they should highlight how the science and technology incorporated into the activities is relevant to each participant’s life.50

The workshop design intentionally fused technical-digital and cultural literacies. The goal was to not only teach children the technical skills required for 3D printing, but to also “encourage children to reflect on cultural knowledge associated with artifacts encountered during their museum visit.”51 In the two-part workshop, children were first given a cultural-historical introduction to footwear and shoe buckles from the museum education team. This presentation incorporated shoes made by various cultures from the Bata museum’s teaching collection, gave students a “broad survey of shoemaking practices,” and focused on “how, when, and why shoe buckles were used, as well as methods for decoration as signs of wealth and power.”52 This was then followed by an introduction to 3D design software and the processes of fabrication and small-scale manufacturing. The room had design stations, where participants could digitally create their own 3D-printable shoe buckles via laptops or tablets; observation stations where participants could watch the design and printing processes and examine the shoe buckles created by their peers or in the museum’s collection; and activity stations, where participants that completed tasks could explore other applications to create additional 3D models. Although students were engaged in the 3D fabrication process, the technology component was de-centered by equally weighting the museum’s cultural heritage presentation, giving students opportunities to play with shoes from the collection, and simplifying the digital modeling process by encouraging use of pre-loaded shapes and figures on tablet devices.

A fourth station in the workshop room was used for assessments and interviews by the researchers. Researchers were looking to answer several questions: How can hands-on experiences for children with technologies like 3D printing and digital modeling be used to foster cultural understanding and literacy about objects in the museum as well as the technologies that are used? Does the construction of an artifact lead to a greater understanding of the artifact’s historical and contemporary existence? Can children draw connections to the material history of an artifact through digital design processes?53

The research results showed that students were able to understand and articulate knowledge both about the cultural-historical subject matter and the 3D design process.54 Furthermore, they were engaged and excited about both the museum content and the technologies. They were able to apply the knowledge to shoes from other cultures not shown in the workshop presentation, to contemporary footwear, and their own lives, indicating the depth of their understanding and the ability of the workshop to foster cross-cultural connection. The process of making their own objects helped the students to reflect and build on what they learned in the presentation. They were able to connect their own design choices and contemporary examples to the cultural-historical context of shoe buckles being designed for utility and to demonstrate wealth and power.

When asked about the shoe-buckles they created, “participants noted they chose designs and letters to personalize their objects,” indicating an excitement towards using 3D technologies for creative purposes.55 Students also commented on the creativity expressed in designs made by their peers. Researchers concluded that this workshop was successful and that activities which de-center technology, allow for “creative modes of engagement”, and “equally weight digital-technological and cultural-historical literacies at the same time are both feasible and crucial to the successful deployment of new technology interactions by museums.”56

Facilitating Conversations around Technology at the Children’s Creativity Museum, San Francisco

As a 2019 education intern at the Children’s Creativity Museum (CCM) in San Francisco, I experienced first-hand the success of these principals emphasized by the researchers at the Bata Shoe Museum. During general admission hours, I taught basic, intermediate, and advanced art and technology skills to youth (ages 2-12) and families in six multi-media exhibit spaces. Educators and interns collaborated to facilitate field trip programs and provide a fun and engaging learning environment that supported the growth of students’ creative confidence. Nurturing creative confidence and collaboration is at the core of CCM’s educational philosophy.57 Each of the field trips and exhibits is designed to provide opportunities for creative expression, innovation, and critical thinking, and cultural-historical connections with the surrounding neighborhood and Bay Area are often explored.

In 2017, CCM was at the center of a neighborhood under major construction. The Community Lab, which inhabited a large, domed room in the museum, was transformed into Sketch Town, a new immersive, digital experience. Partnering with teamLab and Hitachi America, a virtual city was projected onto the domed room. Colorful roads spanned the city, rockets flew in the sky, and a helicopter provided a moving view of the city projected onto another screen. Sketch Town gave visitors the opportunity to draw their own buildings, cars, trucks, flying ships, or helicopters. When completed, they could scan their creations, watch it upload and drop directly into the virtual city, and interact with their creations on the screen.

With guided facilitation from the educators, Sketch Town used art and technology to “inspire conversations about the elements of strong communities including: diversity, civic function, public spaces, environments, creative expression, design, and technology.”58 When I worked as the facilitator in this space, I prompted children with various questions including, “What do you imagine in a city of the future?” and “What can you add to our shared city to make it more safe or welcoming?” The goal was to foster creativity, empathy for the communities you live alongside, and critical thinking around architecture, city planning, and construction.

As part of the Imagination Lab, AR Sandboxes “offer kids a hands-on introduction to topography, where they can move, dig, and shape Kinetic Sand into personalized landscapes.”59 Through the Map Makers activity, kids explore the dynamics of water flow and watersheds on a topographic map that changes colors as they modify the landscape. The Habit Helpers activity produces land and sea animals on the sand, prompting questions about human impact on the planet and how to design a habit that can help both land and water creatures survive.

In the Animation Studio, kids learn the basics of stop-motion animation, first by developing their own stories and creating figures from clay and wire frames, then by bringing them to life on screen. For general admission visitors that needed support creating stories, we encouraged creative expression around their identity and things important to them: spending time with family or friends, their favorite superheroes, dreams about what they want to be or do when they grow up. During field trips, students learn about the history of stop-motion animation, see examples of different tools that can be used to enhance their films, and work through the entire process of creating a short film from start to end. Depending on the needs of the teacher and the grade level, students were encouraged to explore more complex topics like history, health, and social justice. Students animated stories about family or cultural traditions, saving animals, stopping bullying, and more. The technology used were computers with webcam or iPads and the software iStopMotion, and it was setup so that visitors could learn it very quickly: all they needed to do was press a button to take a picture. The technology is de-centered, storyboarding is given equal weight, and students are encouraged to think imaginatively about how to convey meaningful stories through stop-motion without sound.

While Sketch Town, AR sandboxes, and the Animation Studio are examples of high-tech activities, CCM also utilizes low-tech to provide opportunities to practice creativity and making. In the Innovation Studio, visitors encounter the Mystery Box Challenge: they are given a mystery box of supplies and an age-appropriate prompt inviting invention such as shoes for space travel, a flying machine that can carry elephants, or a device that can eliminate polluted air over the San Francisco Bay. The mystery boxes contain an assortment of traditional arts and crafts supplies, such as cardboard, bottles and bottlecaps, straws, wire, yarn, and beads. Scissors and tape are always available, and other supplies rotate as staff and outside sources donate materials. Kids are challenged to ideate something that solves the problem presented in their prompt, then to think about how to build it and ensure structural integrity. Facilitators challenge them to articulate their design process and describe the function of different parts of their inventions. Although the Innovation Studio is a low-tech makerspace, it allows children to engage in the act of making, thinking about problems, and designing solutions that will advance society or make the world a better place. The space also encourages intra-group collaboration between children and their accompanying adults, visitors coming in large groups, and within classes of students during field trips. Creativity is fostered with open-ended prompts and always-changing mystery boxes of supplies that challenge participants to use familiar materials in new ways.

Though the making and STEAM activities are largely self-directed, as in the fashion of the maker and STEAM movements, my experience at CCM demonstrated the importance of facilitation to help visitors achieve a meaningful, humanized experience with technology and interdisciplinary learning. Conversations were guided to help visitors think about how we can use science and technology creatively to benefit our lives and care for those around us, whether through city planning, taking care of the natural environment, storytelling, or innovation. Other professionals in museum makerspaces have stressed the importance of facilitation as well. The Science Museum of Minnesota depends on volunteer facilitation to support learning through making; in order to carry out their vision, the volunteer training focuses on “fostering conversation, since it is fundamental to their work with learners.”60 Through a two year research-practice partnership, Annie White et al. developed and published a Model of Facilitated Making in museum makerspaces. Recognizing that facilitation “often does not get highlighted compared to the tools and materials used by children,” the model “categorizes types of facilitation moves, describes environmental influences on facilitation, offers a process for considering techniques educators may use to facilitate,” and invites museum educators to reflect on their practice.61

Conclusion

Since 2010, the STEAM and Maker movements have been widely embraced in both formal and informal learning environments across the country. Both movements grew out of increasing STEM proficiency and preparing a better STEM workforce, but all too often, schools place too much focus on designing the learning space and acquiring the technology, and not enough focus on the learning experiences.62 Being in a makerspace or using technology alone does not mean that students are engaging in standards-based STEAM learning or developing the soft skills necessary for human-centered problem solving that the STEM movement was failing to teach – creativity, collaboration, and empathy.63 Museums, with their long history of creation as a form of engagement, and as public institutions with missions often centered around inspiration and social change, are well suited to create successful STEAM or making experiences that are human-centered and foster these soft skills.

STEAM and making-centered activities in museums are most beneficial when participants can engage in creative expression, dialogue, and see connections between the skills learned and their lives or how to make the world a better place. Resources and technology are important, but de-centering the technology and guided facilitation are two strategies that effectively create learning experiences that cultivate creativity, cultural-historical understanding, and human-centered problem-solving skills. As the case studies have shown, both high-tech and low-tech are suitable, and museums can partner with other organizations to acquire the technology or develop the educational activities. Remembering to prioritize the soft-skills is essential for museums continuing to develop STEAM and making-centered activities to support schools, K-12 student growth, and our next generation of innovators.

Notes

  1. Veena Vijayakumar, “Steam-Powered: Integrating The Arts And Sciences Into MuseumEducational Practices,” M.A. Thesis San Francisco State University, 2015. ↩︎

  2. Karen Woodruff, “A History of STEM - Reigniting the Challenge with NGSS and CCSS”, 2013, http://www.us-satellite.net/STEMblog/?p=31, quoted in Veena Vijayakumar, “Steam-Powered: Integrating The Arts And Sciences Into Museum Educational Practices”. ↩︎

  3. Boris Granovsky,“Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: An Overview,” Congressional Research Service, June 12, 2018, accessed November 9, 2021, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45223.pdf. ↩︎

  4. David Langdon, George McKittrick, David Beede, Beethika Khan, and Mark Doms, “STEM: Good Jobs Now and For the Future,” U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration, ESA Issue Brief #03-11, 2011, https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/migrated/reports/stemfinalyjuly14_1.pdf. ↩︎

  5. Ryan Noonan, “STEM Jobs: 2017 Update,” U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration, ESA Issue Brief #02-17, 2017, https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/migrated/reports/stem-jobs-2017-update.pdf. ↩︎

  6. “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math: Education for Global Leadership,” U.S. Department of Education, 2010, https://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/stem-overview.pdf. ↩︎

  7. “Critical Evidence: How the Arts Benefit Student Achievement,” National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, 2006, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529766.pdf. ↩︎

  8. Jen Katz-Buonincontro, Brian Smith, & Jacqueline Genovesi, “Steam-based approaches to out-of-school learning,” in The SAGE encyclopedia of out-of-school learning, ed. Kylie Pepper, SAGE Publications, Inc., 2017, https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781483385198.n285. ↩︎

  9. “Gathering STEAM in Rhode Island,” Rhode Island School of Design, July 15, 2014, accessed October 10, 2021, https://www.risd.edu/news/stories/gathering-steam-rhode-island. ↩︎

  10. “What is STEAM Education? Enhancing STEM with the Power of the Arts,” Bellarmine University, accessed Octobert 10, 2021, https://www.bellarmine.edu/blog/article/posts/2020/03/16/what-is-steam-education-enhancing-stem-with-the-power-of-the-arts/. ↩︎

  11. Suzanne Choney, “Why do girls lose interest in STEM? New research has some answers – and what we can do about it”, Microsoft, March 13, 2018, https://news.microsoft.com/features/why-do-girls-lose-interest-in-stem-new-research-has-some-answers-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/. ↩︎

  12. Choney, “Why do girls lose interest in STEM?”. ↩︎

  13. Steve Tomasco, “IBM 2010 Global CEO Study: Creativity Selected as the Most Crucial Factor for Future Success,” IBM, May 18, 2010, https://newsroom.ibm.com/2010-05-18-IBM-2010-Global-CEO-Study-Creativity-Selected-as-Most-Crucial-Factor-for-Future-Success. ↩︎

  14. Paul Petrone, “Why Creativity is the Most Important Skill in the World,” LinkedIn, November 31, 2018, https://www.linkedin.com/business/learning/blog/top-skills-and-courses/why-creativity-is-the-most-important-skill-in-the-world. ↩︎

  15. Edward P. Clapp and Raquel L. Jimenez, “Implementing STEAM in Maker-Centered Learning,” Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 10, no. 4 (2016): 482, http://dx.doi.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/10.1037/aca0000066 . ↩︎

  16. Erica Rosenfeld Halverson and Kimberly Sheridan, “The Maker Movement in Education,” Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard Educational Review 84, no. 4 (2014): 496. ↩︎

  17. Janet Ochs, Richard Powell, and Lisa Czirr, “The Origins of the Maker Movement,” in Resources for Makerspaces, Choice 56, no. 7 (2019), https://ala-choice.libguides.com/c.php?g=912604&p=6573864. ↩︎

  18. “What’s a Makerspace?,” Make, Make Community LLC, https://make.co/, quoted in Amy Oates, “Evidences of Learning in an Art Museum Makerspace,” M.A. Thesis University of Washington, 2015. ↩︎

  19. “Making,” Institute of Museum and Library Services. ↩︎

  20. Clapp and Jimenez, “Implementing STEAM,” 482. ↩︎

  21. Amy Oates, “Evidences of Learning in an Art Museum Makerspace,” M.A. University of Washington, 2015, 9. ↩︎

  22. Mark Hatch, The Maker Movement Manifesto: Rules for Innovation in the New World of Crafters, Hackers, and Tinkerers, (McGraw-Hill, 2013). ↩︎

  23. Zoe Sullivan, “Why a Makerspace Popped up in a Museum,” Next City, July 9, 2019, https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/entry/why-a-makerspace-popped-up-in-a-museum. ↩︎

  24. “What’s a Makerspace?,” Make, Make Community LLC, https://make.co/, quoted in Amy Oates, “Evidences of Learning in an Art Museum Makerspace,” M.A. University of Washington, 2015, 10. ↩︎

  25. Halverson and Sheridan, “The Maker Movement in Education,” 499. ↩︎

  26. Halverson and Sheridan, “The Maker Movement in Education,” 499. ↩︎

  27. “Making,” Institute of Museum and Library Services, accessed October 10, 2021, https://www.imls.gov/our-work/priority-areas/making. ↩︎

  28. Maria C. Zacharias, “Learning through making,” National Science Foundation, June 17, 2014, accessed Nov. 8, 2021, https://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=131761. ↩︎

  29. Desi Gonzalez, “Museum making: Creating with emerging technologies in art museums,” MW2015: Museums and the Web 2015, February 1, 2015, accessed November 9, 2021, https://mw2015.museumsandtheweb.com/paper/museum-making-creating-with-emerging-technologies-in-art-museums/. ↩︎

  30. “Peabody Essex Museum Invites Innovators to its Maker Lounge,” ArtfixDaily, January 8, 2015, https://www.artfixdaily.com/artwire/release/4345-peabody-essex-museum-invites-innovators-to-its-maker-lounge. ↩︎

  31. “About ARTLAB,” Hirshhorn Museum, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, accessed Nov. 8, 2021, https://hirshhorn.si.edu/explore/about-artlab/. ↩︎

  32. “Draper Spark!Lab,” National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, accessed November 9, 2021, https://americanhistory.si.edu/exhibitions/sparklab. ↩︎

  33. Castle U. Kim, “When a Summer Camp, Innovation Hub and an Herbarium Meet: How STEAM Collaboration Can Build A Humanized Experience with Technology,”In Humanizing the Digital: Unproceedings from the MCN 2018 Conference, by Suse Anderson, Isabella Bruno, Hannah Hethmon, Seema Rao, Ed Rodley, and Rachel Ropeik, Ad Hoc Museum Collective, 2019, https://ad-hoc-museum-collective.github.io/humanizing-the-digital/chapters/15/. ↩︎

  34. Gonzalez, “Museum making: Creating with emerging technologies in art museums”. ↩︎

  35. Paulo Freire, “Chapter 2 from ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed,’” Race/ethnicity : multidisciplinary global contexts 2, no. 2 (2009): 57-74. ↩︎

  36. Freire, “Chapter 2 from ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed,’” 66-7. ↩︎

  37. Gonzalez, “Museum making: Creating with emerging technologies in art museums”. ↩︎

  38. Nina Simon, “Preface: Why Participate?,” In The Participatory Museum, Santa Cruz: Museum 2.0, 2010, http://www.participatorymuseum.org/preface/. ↩︎

  39. Simon, Nina. The Participatory Museum. ↩︎

  40. Gonzalez, “Museum making.” ↩︎

  41. Don Undeen, “Introducing the Media Lab,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art, September 27, 2013, https://www.metmuseum.org/blogs/digital-underground/posts/2013/introducing-the-media-lab. ↩︎

  42. Halverson and Sheridan, “The Maker Movement in Education,” 499. ↩︎

  43. “Brinn Museum named one of 15 National Designated Making Space Hubs,” OnMilwaukee, February 22, 2018, https://onmilwaukee.com/articles/brinn-steam-schools. ↩︎

  44. “Brinn Museum named one of 15 National Designated Making Space Hubs,” OnMilwaukee. ↩︎

  45. Jacqualine Grant and Delaney Patterson, “Innovative Arts Programs Require Innovative Partnerships: A Case Study of STEAM Partnering between an Art Gallery and a Natural History Museum,” The Clearning House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas 89, no. 4-5 (2016): 146. ↩︎

  46. D. Dougherty, “The maker movement,” Innovations 7, no 3. (2012), 11-14. Quoted in Annie White, Thomas Akiva, Peter S. Wardrip, Lisa Brahms, “Facilitated Making in Museum-Based Educational Makerspaces,” Curator 64, no. 1 (2021): 131–154. ↩︎

  47. Castle U. Kim, “When a Summer Camp, Innovation Hub and an Herbarium Meet.” ↩︎

  48. Hannah Turner, Gabby Resch, Daniel Southwick, Rhonda McEwen, Adam K. Dube, and Isaac Record, “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement with Young Audiences: Lessons from Workshops in a Museum,” Curator 60, no. 3 (2017): 311-333, https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12224. ↩︎

  49. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 311. ↩︎

  50. “What is STEAM Education?,” Bellarmine University. ↩︎

  51. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 314. ↩︎

  52. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 317. ↩︎

  53. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 311. ↩︎

  54. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 328. ↩︎

  55. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 328-329. ↩︎

  56. Turner et al., “Using 3D Printing to Enhance Understanding and Engagement,” 330. ↩︎

  57. “Mission and Vision,” Children’s Creativity Museum, accessed October 10, 2021, https://creativity.org/mission-vision/. ↩︎

  58. “Fulfill your design + build inspiration at Sketch Town,” Yerba Buena Gardens, October 27, 2017, https://yerbabuenagardens.com/fulfill-design-build_inspiration-sketch-town/. ↩︎

  59. “Imagination Lab,” Children’s Creativity Museum, accessed October 10, 2021, https://creativity.org/blog/exhibits/imagination-lab/. ↩︎

  60. Institute of Museum and Library Services (U.S.) and Children’s Museum ofPittsburg, Making+ Learning in Museums and Libraries A Practitioner’s Guide and Framework, Institute of Museum and Library Services (U.S.), 2016, 26-27. ↩︎

  61. White et al., “Facilitated Making in Museum‐Based Educational Makerspaces,” 131. ↩︎

  62. Kristin Cook and Sarah Bush, “Design thinking in integrated STEAM learning: Surveying the landscape and exploring exemplars in elementary grades,” School Science and Mathematics 118, no 3 (2018): 93-103. doi: 10.1111/ssm.12268. ↩︎

  63. Kristin Cook and Sarah Bush, Step into STEAM: Your standards-based action plan for deepening mathematics and science learning ( Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2019), quoted in Sarah Bush and Kristin Cook, “STEAM Learning Experiences: Thinking Beyond a Makerspace,” Corwin Connect, July 10, 2019, https://corwin-connect.com/2019/07/steam-learning-experiences-thinking-beyond-a-makerspace/. ↩︎