[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Gendered Access in Crafting and Electronics Practices



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