What to make of makerspaces

Abstract

Purpose – Much has been published on makerspaces: the history, development and progress and how they are used – stories of successes and opinions on their potential. The purpose of this paper is to comment on such publications within the library and information science (LIS) literature and to warn libraries to not only focus on providing physical spaces and tools but to explore the bigger potential of extended, interconnected spaces for information and information resources and “mutations” of makerspaces such as makerlearning. Design/methodology/approach – The contribution is based on a pragmatic and reflective analysis of the LIS literature on makerspaces. The questions are: what to make of the literature, and what needs to be done to enrich the subject literature to support an interconnected approach to makerspaces and information resources and information support? Findings – There is a very strong focus in the literature on libraries as physical spaces for makerspaces, the planning, provision, maintenance and how-we-do-it approaches. Although very important this does not sufficiently explore an interconnection between makerspaces and an expanded information-related involvement of libraries, e.g. in information literacy training, guided inquiry, bridging the digital divide, research (embedded librarianship) and community support. Research limitations/implications – There are many publications on makerspaces in the LIS literature. They however, mostly do not reflect on the opportunities to take a more holistic look at the potential of makerspaces in libraries interconnected to the use of information resources, and information-related support and intervention from libraries. Originality/value – Although there are many papers on makerspaces the purpose of this contribution is to focus on extended input from libraries.

Technology Skills in the Workplace: Information Professionals’ Current Use and Future Aspirations

“…Fourie and Meyer provided an overview of the existing makerspace literature, finding that most research efforts focus on the needs and construction of the physical space. 27 Given the general popularity of the topic (as detailed in Moorefield-Lang), 28 it is interesting to note that such technologies were infrequently mentioned by survey participants, both in those desiring to learn these tools and those who were currently using them. The most infrequent skills used (figure 2) included makerspace technologies, 3D printers, augmented, and virtual reality.…”

Service Blueprinting: A Method for Assessing Library Technologies within an Interconnected Service Ecosystem

“…In an effort to keep up to date with patrons' information seeking needs, libraries increasingly focus on innovation (Youngman 1999;Weiner 2003 (Clark and Palmer 2005;Bertot 2009). Some libraries also support more specialized services such as makerspaces (sometimes called hack labs) with computers, 3D printers, and audio/video capture and editing tools (Moorefield-Lang 2015;Meyer and Fourie 2015;Willett 2016); large display walls for data visualization, data analysis, presentations, events, and teaching (Brosz, Rashleigh, and Boyer 2015); and augmented or virtual reality equipment (van Arnhem, Elliott, and Rose 2018).…”

The Role of Responsive Library Makerspaces in Supporting Informal Learning in the Digital Humanities

“…At the heart of this "tinkering" process, students develop a personally meaningful idea, get stuck but persist to make breakthroughs and find solutions to problems which arise, not through being assigned, but through the learners initial "exploratory engagement with the materials, people, practices, and ideas available in the tinkering setting" [13]. By collaborating with teaching faculty to use this approach to engage with the curriculum, makerspaces offer opportunities to support class projects or activities and showcasing or exhibiting student work [14,15] as our experience demonstrates.…”