Maker Philosophy
I feel as if making falls broadly into two categories, practical applications and emotional applications. Even though both are valid forms of making, to me, the maker movement and what it is trying to achieve leans heavily towards the emotional applications. By this I mean that making means something personal to the individual creating it. This definition is more inclusive and lowers the barrier of entry, especially to students who may not have access or familiarity with a lot of the tools and processes that can be involved in making. While everyone may not have or may not see value in the practical applications of making, it is very easy to tie what is being made to an aspect of yourself. Trying to implement projects that are more "makery" in the classroom helped me to realize that setting an overall broad definition for making is problematic. Student's diverse backgrounds meant that to one individual making meant an entirely different thing than another. Some were used to and comfortable with using tools but weren't use to using those tools in an application that wasn't work related, and vice versa, some students had lofty ambition but no idea how to practically apply that in a real world situation. In both cases though, the urge to create was there, the students were just missing out on some skills that could be worked on.
I started making when I was young but I didn't see it as making, I saw it as work. I was raised in an environment where if a problem needed to be solved, then it would be solved one way or another. However, I really can't recall my father or mother making for joy or having an emotional attachment to what they made. My father's creations always dealt with solving a problem at work and my mother's creativity in the kitchen seemed to be out of necessity. Because of this, my definition of what it meant to make started out rigid and work-centered. Making solved issues and had practical applications. While this did help me out being comfortable using and learning about new tools and procedures, it hindered what I felt was "worthwhile" making.
Part of the reason why I joined UTeach Maker is that I was interested in how to apply this practical application in the classroom, however what I saw was people creating for their own enjoyment even if what resulted wasn't "practical. This helped to broaden my view of what it meant to make. After reading Hatch's "The Maker Movement Manifesto," one of the first things he states in the book really resonated with this realization. "Making is fundamental to what it means to be human. We must make, create, and express ourselves to feel whole." Up till then I had viewed making as a means to solve a problem, not necessarily as a form of expression. The Maker Movement Manifesto talks about many other aspects that tie into making, but to me, this first one resonated the most and helped to form my own personal definition of making.
It had been mentioned at a Maker meeting a while that if the definition for making can include anything then it includes nothing. I didn't like that so much, because there is value in every thing that is created by someone. However, the common thread that runs through the making movement is the emotional attachment towards the end product. Many of the simple projects I have started could be bought online, many of the products that students make can once again just bought for less "hassle". Almost all of these projects don't necessarily have a direct connection to a real world application, and even less are directly relevant to any one particular student's post high school education. Many of the products that my students, or even I, have ended up with were far from ideal or practical but they were ours. For example, I had students make trebuchets out of 3D printed parts. I highly doubt student's will need to build siege weapons in their life after high school, but they each had a personal investment in their final product, which I believe was enhanced by their ability to create that product from scratch. As an added bonus, the skills they learned along the way could be applied to many other products, in and out of school.
When I started UTeach Maker, I felt as if the things I made weren't "good enough" or that they had to be 100% unique in order to fall under the "maker" umbrella. Throughout all the cohort meetings and workshops, I learned that making is more so about the process and that there is something unique about putting the pieces together yourself. To me now, making is an extension of ourselves. What we like, care about and are capable of doing.
My maker philosophy highlights the emotional connection that can be made with the final product because it provides an easy way to reach people who may not feel as if their skills qualify them to make.
Making, to me, is the emotional connection that you foster with your product, by way of taking charge of the process by which the product is created.
I feel as if making falls broadly into two categories, practical applications and emotional applications. Even though both are valid forms of making, to me, the maker movement and what it is trying to achieve leans heavily towards the emotional applications. By this I mean that making means something personal to the individual creating it. This definition is more inclusive and lowers the barrier of entry, especially to students who may not have access or familiarity with a lot of the tools and processes that can be involved in making. While everyone may not have or may not see value in the practical applications of making, it is very easy to tie what is being made to an aspect of yourself. Trying to implement projects that are more "makery" in the classroom helped me to realize that setting an overall broad definition for making is problematic. Student's diverse backgrounds meant that to one individual making meant an entirely different thing than another. Some were used to and comfortable with using tools but weren't use to using those tools in an application that wasn't work related, and vice versa, some students had lofty ambition but no idea how to practically apply that in a real world situation. In both cases though, the urge to create was there, the students were just missing out on some skills that could be worked on.
I started making when I was young but I didn't see it as making, I saw it as work. I was raised in an environment where if a problem needed to be solved, then it would be solved one way or another. However, I really can't recall my father or mother making for joy or having an emotional attachment to what they made. My father's creations always dealt with solving a problem at work and my mother's creativity in the kitchen seemed to be out of necessity. Because of this, my definition of what it meant to make started out rigid and work-centered. Making solved issues and had practical applications. While this did help me out being comfortable using and learning about new tools and procedures, it hindered what I felt was "worthwhile" making.
Part of the reason why I joined UTeach Maker is that I was interested in how to apply this practical application in the classroom, however what I saw was people creating for their own enjoyment even if what resulted wasn't "practical. This helped to broaden my view of what it meant to make. After reading Hatch's "The Maker Movement Manifesto," one of the first things he states in the book really resonated with this realization. "Making is fundamental to what it means to be human. We must make, create, and express ourselves to feel whole." Up till then I had viewed making as a means to solve a problem, not necessarily as a form of expression. The Maker Movement Manifesto talks about many other aspects that tie into making, but to me, this first one resonated the most and helped to form my own personal definition of making.
It had been mentioned at a Maker meeting a while that if the definition for making can include anything then it includes nothing. I didn't like that so much, because there is value in every thing that is created by someone. However, the common thread that runs through the making movement is the emotional attachment towards the end product. Many of the simple projects I have started could be bought online, many of the products that students make can once again just bought for less "hassle". Almost all of these projects don't necessarily have a direct connection to a real world application, and even less are directly relevant to any one particular student's post high school education. Many of the products that my students, or even I, have ended up with were far from ideal or practical but they were ours. For example, I had students make trebuchets out of 3D printed parts. I highly doubt student's will need to build siege weapons in their life after high school, but they each had a personal investment in their final product, which I believe was enhanced by their ability to create that product from scratch. As an added bonus, the skills they learned along the way could be applied to many other products, in and out of school.
When I started UTeach Maker, I felt as if the things I made weren't "good enough" or that they had to be 100% unique in order to fall under the "maker" umbrella. Throughout all the cohort meetings and workshops, I learned that making is more so about the process and that there is something unique about putting the pieces together yourself. To me now, making is an extension of ourselves. What we like, care about and are capable of doing.
My maker philosophy highlights the emotional connection that can be made with the final product because it provides an easy way to reach people who may not feel as if their skills qualify them to make.
Making, to me, is the emotional connection that you foster with your product, by way of taking charge of the process by which the product is created.