[Xmca-l] Re: Gendered Access in Crafting and Electronics Practices
Karen Wohlwend
kwohlwen@gmail.com
Thu Oct 23 10:40:51 PDT 2014
this time with attachment
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Karen Wohlwend <kwohlwen@gmail.com> wrote:
> this time with attachment
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Karen Wohlwend <kwohlwen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Certainly-- Rowsell and Pahl take an ethnographic approach to track the
>> practices and user identities involved in the production and previous uses
>> of an artifact.
>>
>> Rowsell, J., & Pahl, K. (2007). Sedimented identities in texts: Instances
>> of practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(3), 388-404.
>>
>> Pahl, K., & Rowsell, J. (2010). Artifactual literacies: Every object
>> tells a story. New York: Teachers College Press.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:56 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Karen--- I am familiar of course with the notion of artifacts, but I am
>>> not
>>> familiar with
>>> Rowsell and Pahl's sedimented identities and artifactual literacies.
>>> Could
>>> you provide a link or a reference? The phrase has me wondering what a
>>> non-artifactual literacy would be.
>>> mike
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Karen Wohlwend <kwohlwen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Andy, thanks for these generative questions and comments! I'll defer
>>> to my
>>> > co-authors to situate the focal case in the larger study but I'll
>>> address
>>> > how we are considering relationships among gender, practices, and
>>> tools.
>>> >
>>> > We're conceptualizing tools as anchoring artifacts, that concretize and
>>> > suggest particular uses and users accrued from cultural histories of
>>> > access and use (following Holland and Cole's cultural artifacts, and
>>> more
>>> > recently, Rowsell and Pahl's sedimented identities and artifactual
>>> > literacies). Tools index shared histories of use, values, and
>>> expectations
>>> > for who *should *be a user and for how practices *should *be conducted,
>>> > practices which following Paechter are situated in communities of
>>> gendered
>>> > practice that are multiple, local, and embodied.
>>> >
>>> > However, we would not say that a tool is gendered in any fixed or
>>> > deterministic way. In any given moment of activity, tools signal
>>> multiple
>>> > histories in many nexus of practice (following Ron Scollon, the tacit
>>> > shared practices that members of a community expect of one another)
>>> that
>>> > lead up to, enter in, and flow from that moment, in contradictory,
>>> > confounding, and complementary ways, hence the ambiguity you've
>>> mentioned.
>>> > How/whether social actors make use of particular histories in a
>>> specific
>>> > context realizes foregrounds some histories while backgrounding
>>> others-- in
>>> > ways that can reproduce, contest, or blur prevailing expectations for
>>> > participation. In our analysis, we looked closely at the mediated
>>> actions
>>> > in the handling of tools in the one nexus to understand in a very
>>> concrete
>>> > way how girls were able to gain and maintain control over
>>> > projects--contrary to histories and expectations for high levels of
>>> tool
>>> > handling, participation, and trajectories of expertise for boys in
>>> > electronics activity.
>>> >
>>> > Looking closely at the mediated action in this transformative moment
>>> > reveals how changing the electronics tools from wires to needle and
>>> thread
>>> > changes the nexus, activating a powerful perception/expectation for
>>> girls
>>> > as appropriate tool users by signalling histories of sewing practices
>>> and
>>> > feminine communities of practice.
>>> >
>>> > In regard to other situations, looking closely at mediated actions,
>>> > material artifacts, and tacit expectations for participation in the
>>> > relevant nexus of practice will likely also reveal how materials
>>> relate to
>>> > stereotypical expectations, pointing to places ripe for rupture where
>>> > changing something small in the local activity (e.g., an action, a
>>> tool, a
>>> > material) in dominant nexus of practice can signal a different kind of
>>> user
>>> > and potentially disrupt persistent and naturalized stereotypes.
>>> >
>>> > Looking forward to continuing the conversation,
>>> > Karen
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Kylie & co.,
>>> > > A fascinating study around a truly ingenious approach to the gendered
>>> > > division of labour - giving school kids E-textiles to construct an
>>> > > electronic device - total mixing up and confounding the gender
>>> > stereotypes
>>> > > about sewing and electronics, etc.
>>> > >
>>> > > Some of the results were quite startling. That the young boy should
>>> not
>>> > > just abstain and demonstratively not pay attention, but pay active
>>> and
>>> > > supportive attention to the girl making the circuit with her
>>> > > needle-and-thread - an admired female-typical stance one would have
>>> > thought
>>> > > a young male incapable of adopting with a female workmate. And that
>>> the
>>> > > gender-inscription of the sewing tools over-rode the greater
>>> experience
>>> > > that in this case the young boy had in using them, with the boy
>>> deferring
>>> > > to the less experienced girl in recognition of the
>>> gender-appropriateness
>>> > > of her "taking charge" with the needle-and-thread. This does cause
>>> one to
>>> > > think a little deeper into how we might conceptualise such gendered
>>> > > behaviours.
>>> > >
>>> > > As you would know, MCA has a strong preference for qualitative
>>> research,
>>> > > and studies with small sample sizes are not generally a problem, but
>>> so
>>> > > much seemed to hinge on the study of just *one* boy-girl team, that
>>> I am
>>> > > concerned about the capacity to generalise from such a base. There
>>> were
>>> > > about 80 youth in the activity as a whole, so I can only hope and
>>> presume
>>> > > that observation of the other 78 kids in some way guided the work
>>> focused
>>> > > on just 2.
>>> > >
>>> > > I must say, the analysis of the video data is very sophisticated and
>>> > > productive and you are to be congratulated on this aspect of the
>>> work. I
>>> > > see that you approach the gendering of the activities through the
>>> idea of
>>> > > the various *tools* being gendered, rather than the *practices*
>>> > themselves.
>>> > > This is something that was really necessary for you to be able to
>>> make
>>> > > these observations, because the gendering of the activities is
>>> ambiguous,
>>> > > but not it seems the gendering of the tools. Is this a result of the
>>> > study,
>>> > > or is it something you already knew or did you arrive at this by
>>> logic?
>>> > >
>>> > > Do you see any other opportunities for confounding gender
>>> stereotypes in
>>> > > this way?
>>> > >
>>> > > And finally, does the experience of working in ambiguous, even
>>> inverted
>>> > > gender-stereotyped activities like these have any outcome which
>>> carries
>>> > > over into a world where the gender division of labour lacks
>>> ambiguity?
>>> > >
>>> > > Andy
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > *Andy Blunden*
>>> > > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Kylie Peppler wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Thanks Andy! We're excited to discuss with the community and would
>>> > >> welcome any comments/questions on this emerging line of research!
>>> > >> Kylie
>>> > >>
>>> > >> ---
>>> > >> Kylie A. Peppler
>>> > >> Assistant Professor of Learning Sciences
>>> > >> Indiana University | School of Education
>>> > >> 1900 E 10th Street | Eigenmann 528 | Bloomington | IN | 47406 |
>>> > >> 812.856.8381
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
>>> > >> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Here's the article for discussion Artin is introducing:
>>> > >> *Hands On, Hands Off: Gendered Access in Crafting and
>>> Electronics
>>> > >> Practices*
>>> > >> Beth Buchholz, Kate Shively, Kylie Peppler, and Karen Wohlwend.
>>> > >> Indiana University.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> The Maker movement promotes hands-on making, including
>>> crafts,
>>> > >> robotics, and computing. The movement’s potential to
>>> transform
>>> > >> education rests in our ability to address notable gender
>>> > >> disparities, particularly in science, technology,
>>> engineering,
>>> > and
>>> > >> mathematics fields. E-textiles - the first female-dominated
>>> > >> computing community - provide inspiration for overcoming
>>> > >> long-standing cultural divides in classrooms. Analysis of
>>> > >> children’s
>>> > >> use of e-textiles reveals that materials like needles,
>>> fabric,
>>> > and
>>> > >> conductive thread rupture traditional gender scripts around
>>> > >> electronics and implicitly gives girls hands-on access and
>>> > >> leadership roles. This reconceptualization of cultural
>>> divides as
>>> > >> sets of tacitly accepted practices rooted in gendered
>>> histories
>>> > has
>>> > >> implications for reconceptualizing traditionally
>>> male-dominated
>>> > >> areas of schooling.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Andy
>>> > >> (attached)
>>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > >> ------------
>>> > >> *Andy Blunden*
>>> > >> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
>>> > >> <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Goncu, Artin wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Dear All,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> We are writing to let you know that the most recent issue of
>>> > >> MCA is out.
>>> > >> One of the articles published in this issue and being
>>> > >> introduced here for
>>> > >> discussion in referenced below. The authors of the article
>>> > >> have kindly
>>> > >> agreed to lead the discussion, and they are on xmca with us
>>> > >> now. The free
>>> > >> access to the article is possible through the links below.
>>> We
>>> > >> are looking
>>> > >> forward to hearing from you all. Best, ag
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hands On, Hands Off: Gendered Access in Crafting
>>> > >> and Electronics Practices
>>> > >> Beth Buchholz, Kate Shively, Kylie Peppler, and Karen
>>> Wohlwend
>>> > >>
>>> > >> www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/10749039.2014.939762
>>> > >> <http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/10749039.2014.939762>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10749039.2014.
>>> > >> 939762#.VEZ25Ra_4wI
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Artin Goncu, Ph.D
>>> > >> Co-editor, Mind, Culture, and Activity:An International
>>> Journal
>>> > >> Professor Emeritus,
>>> > >> University of Illinois at Chicago
>>> > >> College of Education M/C 147
>>> > >> 1040 W. Harrison St.
>>> > >> Chicago, IL 60607
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Karen Wohlwend, Associate Professor
>>> > Literacy, Culture, & Language Education
>>> > Indiana University
>>> > 201 N. Rose Avenue
>>> > Bloomington, IN 47405
>>> > Office: 812-856-8275
>>> > Fax: 812-856-8287
>>> > kwohlwen@indiana.edu
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
>>> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Karen Wohlwend, Associate Professor
>> Literacy, Culture, & Language Education
>> Indiana University
>> 201 N. Rose Avenue
>> Bloomington, IN 47405
>> Office: 812-856-8275
>> Fax: 812-856-8287
>> kwohlwen@indiana.edu
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Karen Wohlwend, Associate Professor
> Literacy, Culture, & Language Education
> Indiana University
> 201 N. Rose Avenue
> Bloomington, IN 47405
> Office: 812-856-8275
> Fax: 812-856-8287
> kwohlwen@indiana.edu
>
--
Karen Wohlwend, Associate Professor
Literacy, Culture, & Language Education
Indiana University
201 N. Rose Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405
Office: 812-856-8275
Fax: 812-856-8287
kwohlwen@indiana.edu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Rowsell Pahl sedimented texts RRQ 2007.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 447745 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20141023/2a1f3e8d/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list