Studying the Formation of an Older Adult-Led Makerspace
Studying the Formation of an Older Adult-Led Makerspace
复制标题
DOI：
10.1145/3411764.3445146
复制
发表时间：
2021-05
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Amanda Lazar;Alisha Pradhan;Ben Jelen;K. Siek;Alex Leitch
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Amanda Lazar;Alisha Pradhan;Ben Jelen;K. Siek;Alex Leitch
创客空间正在各种环境中引入，包括学校和图书馆等社区环境。老年人是一个正在为他们制定议程的群体，其预期成果包括支持机构和福祉。然而，关于老年人制作和DIY的研究通常是研究那些已经从事制作实践的人，或者将个人带入已经创建的技术环境中。在本文中，我们研究了在一个独立的生活社区中，老年人驱动的创客空间的形成。通过民族志知情的方法，我们研究了个人考虑适当分配资源到创客空间，范围活动，评估目标和权衡的方式。我们的分析集中在描述这个创客空间的形成方式以及随着规划的展开，个人对创客空间的三种理解方式：空间的开放性，承诺迎合人口的利益;创客空间的承诺，让更多的居民参与技术，但需要模糊技术，使其具有吸引力;以及对有限的财政和空间资源的投资回报的估值。我们的讨论有助于支持和研究老年人早期采用技术，使“为所有人创造”的愿景复杂化，并提出了关于创客空间社区的考虑。
Makerspaces are being introduced in a wide variety of settings, including community settings such as schools and libraries. Older adults are one group for whom making agendas are being pursued, with envisioned outcomes such as supporting agency and well-being. However, research on making and DIY with older adults typically study individuals who are already engaged in making practices or bring individuals in to a technology environment that has already been created. In this paper, we study the older adult-driven formation of a makerspace in an independent living community. Through an ethnographically-informed approach, we studied the ways that individuals considered appropriate allocation of resources towards a makerspace, scoped activities, evaluated goals, and made trade-offs. Our analysis is centered around describing the way that this makerspace formed as well as three ways that individuals made sense of the makerspace as the planning unfolded: the openness of a space that promises to cater to interests of the population; the promise of a makerspace to involve more residents in technology, but the need to obscure the technology to make it appealing; and a valuation of the return on investment for limited financial and space resources. Our discussion contributes to supporting and studying early adoption of technology by older adults, complicates visions of “making for all,” and presents considerations regarding the often under-specified community of a makerspace.