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

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



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