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

[Xmca-l] Re: Prototyping



Linked here is a read of the maker movement and related moments in history.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/01/13/making-it-2. It came to mind
because it connects some of the pieces that Michael Glassman and others
have put on the table.

I work with some "maker" funded education efforts, and think that nearly
all of the critiques described here stick. The characterizations of
resources, values and politics don't ring true everywhere, but enough
places to worry.

However, to Shirin's concern, I'll share a reflection. When working today
with a 'maker club' in a high school (albeit one with a somewhat
alternative structure, if not a lot of resources), one thing that struck me
was the degree to which the students saw in their 'maker club' an
opportunity to make types of relationships they didn't feel they could
establish in other parts of the school. Many of them described it, and
aspired for it, to be a place where they could relate to peers - across
grades, interests, and cliques - as well as teachers, in ways that felt
different and important. This was primary goal - that seemed to be more
important than the objects they were interested in creating. At least
that's what they told an educator/researcher. I have also seen the
importance of maker spaces in schools as places that allow young people to
keep working in school on things they do or are interested in outside of
school - which is, i think, mostly about subject-subject, even when
disguised as subject-object.

I don't know that these phenomena have to do with the activity of 'making'
or a connection to 'maker movement', (and maybe they happen despite the
maker movement, given it's rhetorical focus). It may just be about sneaking
open-ended work and less hierarchical structures into school, under the
hood of a laser cutter.  Therefore, the claim isn't that 'making' is
anything new, but that it may be able, currently, to create a place to
retain some of the old that's being squeezed out elsewhere (whether that's
creative species being, or just just friendship).  It's no excuse to stop
advocating for and creating this space in other parts of schools, of
course.

As Vossoughi, Escude and Hooper's article shows, what constitutes 'making'
is still being contested. In schools (or afterschool programs - many of
which, with STEM at the bow, are looking more and more schoolish),  I think
there are people working to do with prototyping what Zaza's describes above
as the power of prototyping: create spaces where the learners "realize
there are alternative subject positions" and start to see a role for
themselves in producing the environments (like schools) in which they are
positioned as (coerced) consumers. That's an optimistic take. Producing
those environments through the manufacture of objects is perhaps not the
appropriate place to start, given the abundance and history of objects in
US society. But political structures social relations can feel impenetrable
when looked at head on - as Zaza's great article makes clear.

usually just listening,
- Colin


On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Shirin Vossoughi <
shirinvossoughi@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you Phillip and all
>
> I was very happy to come across the Chachra as I think she draws attention
> to these other forms of making (mending, repair, caring) that may be
> undervalued by the "maker movement", but also that making itself as an
> umbrella term that other forms of human activity are now somehow
> accountable to is too narrow. Here is her piece for those who might be
> interested:
> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/01/why-i-
> am-not-a-maker/384767/
>
> One of the things that continues to worry me is the focus on subject-object
> relations over and above subject-subject relations within making. Or that
> subject-subject relations become valued in so far as they lead to the
> generation of more innovative products, but not as ends in themselves
> (maybe this is more along the lines of conviviality?). This relates in my
> mind to the ways teaching is often positioned as inherently didactic and
> problematic rather than as a potentially powerful, beautiful (and
> bi-directional) relation.
>
> Zaza I am very much looking forward to reading your paper. Thank you for
> sharing it here.
>
> Shirin
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:16 PM, White, Phillip <
> Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > to further support for the case that more is being consumed than
> > information, and conviviality, i quote Jean Lave, from Teaching as
> Learning
> > - "I began to inquire into just what was being learned by the
> apprentices,
> > and found that the apprentices were learning many complex "lessons" at
> > once. To name a few: they were learning relations among the major social
> > identities and divisions in Liberian society which they were in the
> > business of dressing. They were learning to make a life, to make a
> living,
> > to make clothes, to grow old enough, and mature enough to become master
> > tailors, and to see the truth of the respect due to a master of their
> > trade. It seems trivially true that they were never doing only one of
> these
> > things at a time."
> >
> >
> > Teaching, as Learning. in Practice
> >
> > Jean Lave
> >
> >
> > phillip
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:10:01 AM
> > To: Zaza Kabayadondo; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Prototyping
> >
> > Phillip, Michael, Mike
> > To say: Consumed can be an example of full engagement and what is being
> > consumed is more than information, what is also being consumed is (shared
> > feelings) to my ears can be related to Michael’s reminder and return to
> > *tools of conviviality* and also to Franklin who with the guidance of
> > Vivian is learning (and developing) democratic spirit.
> >
> > On page 212 of the article by Vossoughi, Hooper, and Escude is also
> > explored when they reference Chachra (2015) who juxtaposes the KINDS of
> > human activity that *tend to be* (intend, intentional, intentional/ity as
> > multiple lines) VALUED by the maker movement with the everyday practices
> > that have been the practices of  women.
> >
> > These historically practiced ways of making such as:
> > Mending, repairing, teaching, caregoving.
> >
> > The case the article presents is that the making movement may be
> devaluing
> > and delegitimizing  these tools of conviviality. Self-identifying with
> the
> > maker movement may develop through ones *gestures* (meaning making) a
> > gendered way of moving that exemplifies possible gendered forms of
> > engineering design and educational *products* and *productivity* (notice
> > the ity that to my ears calls forth *inner* meaning)
> >
> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >
> > From: Zaza Kabayadondo
> > Sent: October 19, 2016 7:32 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Prototyping
> >
> > Thank you for sharing Vossoughi, Harper and Escudé's paper on the
> > appropriation of "making" in schools. I'm adding this to my syllabus for
> > next semester!
> >
> > I agree with Mike, Peg and Molly's suggestion that there seems to be a
> > natural affinity between the AT in CHAT and prototyping.
> >
> > On the topic of production and consumption: the potency in prototyping
> lies
> > in the contexts for prototyping where learners/prototypers realize there
> > are alternative subject positions for them to occupy. Through prototyping
> > they start to shift from seeing their relationship to the material world
> as
> > one of consumption to seeing the role they can play as producers. Often
> > this role is subversive, and therein lies the difference between
> > kukiya-kiya (and the glossary of similar terms, jailbreaking etc) and
> maker
> > movement. So I guess, what I'm concerned with here is the difference in
> > subject positions associated with consumption and production.
> >
> > Kukiya-kiya is a situated, emergent, form of activity that responds to
> and
> > evolves with political context of subjects who are excluded or
> disinherited
> > (kukiya-kiya) while Maker movement (making as a form of club activity
> > celebrated for its liberatory potential) at least in its present form,
> > mostly entails activity that is sanitized from all political inflection
> and
> > with little proffered in the form of recourse for justice, equity,
> access,
> > ownership of the material. If both are meant to equip learners with a way
> > of thinking about materials as a form of access to things, processes,
> > systems they do not have access to, kukiya-kiya does so without making to
> > much of itself while making (of the maker movement) is all pomp and
> little
> > sense of "how is this useful to me in my situation [of disinheritance]"
> for
> > individual learners.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 6:15 PM, White, Phillip <
> > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > My off the top of my head, Michael, is that in part information is
> being
> > > consumed - as well as shared feelings of success, or frustration, or
> good
> > > cheer.
> > >
> > > Perhaps, even in a Batesonian-way. Imminent mind is being both produced
> > > and consumed.
> > >
> > > And of course, to consume can also be an example of full engagement
> > > (consumed with interest) and the root is "to take up".
> > >
> > > Some thoughts.
> > >
> > > Phillip
> > >
> > > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
> > >   Original Message
> > > From: mike cole
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 3:45 PM
> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > Reply To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Prototyping
> > >
> > >
> > > Hell, Peg -- I cannot get my tomatoes to grow in the odd weather we
> have
> > > had this summer, let alone get them to market. Pretty much can be said
> > for
> > > my scholarly efforts as well!
> > >
> > > I have been mulling over why prototyping and CHAT appear to have a kind
> > of
> > > natural affinity. I am speculating at the moment that both are focused
> on
> > > production, and the AT part of CHAT is very clearly focused on
> > production.
> > > Just think of the activities of those who attend, say, ISCAR.
> > >
> > > But production is intimately (dare I say dialectically?) related to
> > > consumption. Where is the good CHAT scholarship on the Foodie movement?
> > > What is being consumed in an activity-centered classroom or a
> > developmental
> > > work research change lab? Seems worth inquiring about.
> > > mike
> > >
> > > mike
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Greg Thompson <
> > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks to Philip White for pointing me to the alternative (and
> > preferred)
> > > > spelling "jury-rigged". In looking that up, I also found
> "jerry-built"
> > as
> > > > another term.
> > > > (My dad was from Indiana and he always pronounced it "jerry-rigged").
> > > >
> > > > These all differ from the term "hack" which, for me, simultaneously
> has
> > > > connotations of elitism and cultural critique but I'm not sure I
> could
> > > say
> > > > why (maybe because I've heard it frequently used with Ikea - Ikea
> > > hacking).
> > > >
> > > > "Jailbreaking" is an interesting one too - as in "jailbreaking your
> > > > iPhone." That is where you take an existing technology and rebuild it
> > for
> > > > some design other than what it was intended. (I had a friend who was
> > > > building an online educational credentialing website that used the
> > phrase
> > > > "jailbreaking the college degree" - some real trouble there, but I
> > > support
> > > > the idea in principle).
> > > >
> > > > Really appreciate Zaza's paper as well as Shirin et al's paper...
> > > >
> > > > -greg
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Greg Thompson <
> > > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Oops, I sent this directly to Zaza and not to the listserve and it
> > > seems
> > > > > relevant to the Vossoughi et al paper that Mike just posted. It is
> in
> > > > > response to Zaza's list of kukiya-kiya equivalents in other
> > languages:
> > > > >
> > > > > A personal favorite in English is "jerry-rig". Although I should
> add
> > > that
> > > > > this has slightly more of a sense of hasty and perhaps a little bit
> > > > clumsy
> > > > > assembly - suggested to have originated in WWII as somewhat
> derisive
> > > way
> > > > to
> > > > > refer to equipment slapped together by the Germans. Somewhat
> > different
> > > > from
> > > > > other contexts where the sense of necessity is emphasized and haste
> > and
> > > > > clumsiness are less emphasized - if at all. Maybe has something to
> do
> > > > with
> > > > > the tendency in the U.S. to (be able to) rely on "expert"
> manufacture
> > > in
> > > > > the U.S.
> > > > >
> > > > > And, I wonder if this might have something to do with different
> > > > > cultural-ideological contexts of the maker movement vs.
> kukiya-kiya.
> > > > > Whereas kukiya-kiya is an act born of necessity, the maker movement
> > has
> > > > > more of a leisure-class bougie feel to it - an attempt to recover
> > one's
> > > > > creative species being - if you'll allow the drive-by Marx
> reference
> > > (and
> > > > > Mike's earlier example seems some mix of the two - a kukiya-kiya
> > > attempt
> > > > to
> > > > > make ("Engineering") makers out of these kids (something that they
> > > > > certainly already are in many non strictly "Engineering" ways)).
> > > > >
> > > > > Zaza, I wonder if this kind of distinction between innovation of
> > > > necessity
> > > > > and innovation for pleasure makes any sense for what you see there
> on
> > > the
> > > > > ground in the kukiya-kiya case as compared to the maker case? Or if
> > > this
> > > > > distinction is perhaps a bit overdetermined and are there actually
> > both
> > > > > things happening in both cases? (e.g., is there a sense of joy in
> > > > > creativity and making in the kukiya-kiya case?)
> > > > >
> > > > > Enjoying your lovely paper as well as the conversation around it!
> > > > >
> > > > > Very best,
> > > > > greg
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:49 AM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> For those interested in pursuing the implications of Zaza's work
> on
> > > > Kukiya
> > > > >> kiya and the maker movement fashionable in affluent societies, I
> > > > suggest a
> > > > >> new thread with the title, prototyping.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Attached is the paper by Vossoughi, Hooper, and Escudé suggested
> by
> > > > Molly.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> mike
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with
> an
> > > > >> object
> > > > >> that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > > Department of Anthropology
> > > > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > > > > Brigham Young University
> > > > > Provo, UT 84602
> > > > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > Department of Anthropology
> > > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > > > Brigham Young University
> > > > Provo, UT 84602
> > > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> > object
> > > that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>