Slides from the Creative University Conference, 2016

1. MORE THAN SHINY
NEW SPACES FOR
TINKERING
Fostering Design Practices &
Critical Thinking in University
Makerspaces
Carol Brandt, Temple University USA
Rikke Toft Nørgård, Aarhus University

2. Makerspaces,
also known as:
Hackerspaces,
Fab Labs,
DIY spaces
Found in university libraries,
student centers, former art
studios, and student
computer centers: drop-in,
short courses, workshops,
and seminars.

3. Interdisciplinary collaboration
Tools & training for constructing prototypes
Locations for developing creative ideas and problem solving
The promise of makerspaces

4. Makerspace literature: learning and ‘tinkering’ – focused on the
individual. Makerspaces for creating more shiny new things?
Instead, we see university makerspaces as a social community
where students from different fields can learn design thinking
and take on reflective ‘academic citizenship.’
The problem of makerspaces

5. Looking at makerspaces through the lens of signature
pedagogy we might ask:
Can we configure our university makerspaces through signature
pedagogy to foster & promote design practices and citizenship
that work to integrate people, society and university?
Can we use signature pedagogy to integrate Makerspaces as
part of the ‘placeful university’ in terms of building ‘academic
citizenship’ & ‘participatory academic communities.’
Looking at makerspaces

6. From space to stance
To do this we need to figure out:
What kind of teacher stance is necessary to promote design thinking for
university makerspaces?
How might universities influence the productive use of these locations
to promote a stance of interdisciplinarity, collaboration, and critical
problem-solving?
Here signature pedagogy might help us as a structured tool for
figuring this out

7. Makerspace as a design studio:
Signature pedagogy (Shulman, 2005)
Design practice and design thinking are vital for
makerspaces to realize their potential:
Design thinking that forms the foundation of a
making culture
• Surface structures
• Deep structures
• Implicit structures

8. Surface structures (the what of teaching)
Surface structures consist of concrete,
operational acts of teaching & learning
Students undertake a series of
design investigations to define
the problem.
They iterate a range of design
solutions and make low
fidelity models to illustrate
their thinking.

9. Deep structures (the how of teaching)
Teacher stance becomes
more dialogic,
facilitating, and co-
creating.
Teacher
stance
From telling
to dialoguing
demonstrating &
co-creating
From shiny layout
to facilitating
Students & teachers
engage in design crits &
are able to receive
critical feedback, to
provide constructive
criticism & integrate it
into their designs
The teacher imparts an understanding of the way
knowledge is socially constructed through the
enactment of surface structures.

10. Implicit structure (the why of teaching)
From shiny things to ‘participatory
academic communities’: participating in
society through ‘academic maker
citizenship.’ Questioning the role of
technology in society
‘Placeful studios’: structures for the
foundation of ‘academic maker
citizenship’ integrating people, society
and university through tackling wicked
problems & getting wicked ideas
Hidden curriculum: attitudes, values, beliefs
about what constitutes ‘good design’

11. Teaching beyond shiny new spaces
The emergence of co-operative
placeful makerspaces that
integrate university & society;
teachers & students; individual
& collective; head, hand & heart
Students and teachers as
reflexive dialogic participatory
makers integrating personal,
professional & public
responsibility through
‘accountable talk’: virtues and
visions of the educated head,
hand & heart
Signature pedagogy makes explicit what, how & why of teaching in
makerspaces thus enabling a deliberate move beyond tinkering

12. Educationaldesignthinking
inuniversitymakerspaces
Surface structures – e.g.
prototypes
Deep structures
– e.g. design crits
Implicit structures
- e.g. co-operative
citizenship
Student
stance:
reflecting,
relating,
integrating
Teacher
stance:
dialoguing,
facilitating,
co-creating
Citizen
stance:
designing for
others
beyond the
shiny space
Developing a signature pedagogy for future expert
communities & academic citizenship
Beyond shiny new spaces for tinkering

13. Carol Brandt, Temple University USA
carol.brandt@temple.edu
REFERENCES
• Aaen, J. H. & Nørgård R. T. (2015). Participatory academic communities: a
transdisciplinary perspective on participation in education beyond the institution.
Conjunctions: Transdisciplinaru journal of cultural participation 2 (2), 70-98.
• Brandt, C. B., Cennamo, K., Douglas, S.,Vernon, M., & McGrath, M. (2013). A
theoretical framework for the studio as a learning environment. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 329-348.
• Cennamo, K., & Brandt, C. (2012). The “right kind of telling”: Knowledge building
in the academic design studio. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 60(5), 839-858.
• Hjorth, M., Nørgård, R. T., and Iversen, O. S. (forthcoming). Superpositional
teaching: A call for co-creative teacher roles in the educational design studio.
• Nørgård, R. T., & Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2016). Academic citizenship beyond the
campus: a call for the placeful university. Higher Education Research &
Development, 35(1), 4-16.
• Schulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus,
134 (3), 52-59.
Rikke Toft Nørgård, Aarhus University
rtoft@tdm.au.dk