skip to main content
research-article

Makers and Quilters: Investigating Opportunities for Improving Gender-Imbalanced Maker Groups

Published:07 November 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Recent efforts to diversify participation in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math) activities through informal learning environments, such as hackathons and makerspaces, confirm a real desire for inclusion among potential female participants. However, understanding factors that may contribute to longer-term, sustainable diversification of such groups remains a challenge. In this paper, we present the results of a mixed-methods study of two microcosms of making: game development, and quilting. Our findings reveal parallel structures within these groups despite being highly skewed towards male or female participation, respectively. Our results shed light on attitudes, behaviours, and experiences indicating that similar desires for wider community support among other factors exist in both groups, but these needs are not satisfied in the STEM context. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings as opportunities for rethinking how we design the environments that are meant to support design itself, considering the role of technology in these spaces, and prioritizing nurturing the development of the maker community beyond the maker space.

References

  1. Shaowen Bardzell, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Sarah Ng. 2017. Supporting Cultures of Making: Technology, Policy, Visions, and Myths. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 6523--6535. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025975Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Laura Beckwith and Margaret Burnett. 2004. Gender: An important factor in end-user programming environments?. In Visual Languages and Human Centric Computing, 2004 IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA, 107--114. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1372307Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Laura Beckwith, Margaret Burnett, Valentina Grigoreanu, and Susan Wiedenbeck. 2006. Gender hci: What about the software? Computer 39, 11 (2006), 97--101. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=4014778Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Laura Beckwith, Margaret Burnett, Susan Wiedenbeck, Curtis Cook, Shraddha Sorte, and Michelle Hastings. 2005. Effectiveness of end-user debugging software features: Are there gender issues?. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 869--878.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Adam Bradley, Cayley MacArthur, Mark Hancock, and Sheelagh Carpendale. 2015. Gendered or neutral?: considering the language of HCI. In Proceedings of the 41st Graphics Interface Conference. Canadian Information Processing Society, Toronto, Ont., Canada, Canada, 163--170. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2788919Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2 (Jan. 2006), 77--101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Burnett, Laura Beckwith, Susan Wiedenbeck, Scott D. Fleming, Jill Cao, Thomas H. Park, Valentina Grigoreanu, and Kyle Rector. 2011. Gender pluralism in problem-solving software. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (Sept. 2011), 450--460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.06.004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. E. L. Burt and J. Atkinson. 2012. The relationship between quilting and wellbeing. Journal of Public Health 34, 1 (March 2012), 54--59. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdr041Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Paris Buttfield-Addison, Jon Manning, and Tim Nugent. 2016. A Better Recipe for Game Jams: Using the Mechanics Dynamics Aesthetics Framework for Planning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events (GJH&GC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 30--33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897183Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Alan Chatham, Ben A.M. Schouten, Cagdas Toprak, Florian Mueller, Menno Deen, Regina Bernhaupt, Rohit Khot, and Sebastiaan Pijnappel. 2013. Game Jam. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3175--3178. https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2479640Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Sapna Cheryan, Victoria C. Plaut, Paul G. Davies, and Claude M. Steele. 2009. Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, 6 (2009), 1045--1060. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Sharon Lynn Chu, Rebecca Schlegel, Francis Quek, Andrew Christy, and Kaiyuan Chen. 2017. 'I Make, Therefore I Am': The Effects of Curriculum-Aligned Making on Children's Self-Identity. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 109--120. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453. 3025458Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Susan Davis-Ali. 2017. Advancing Women Technologists Into Positions of Leadership. Technical Report. Anita Borg Institute. http://anitab.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/advancing-women-technologists-leaders.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan. 2018. Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/ intrinsic-motivation-inventory/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Maeve Duggan. 2015. Pew Research Center Survey: Gaming and Gamers. Technical Report. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/public-debates-about-gaming-and-gamers/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Richard Eberhardt. 2016. No One Way to Jam: Game Jams for Creativity, Learning, Entertainment, and Research. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events (GJH&GC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 34--37. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897181Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sarah Jane Ferguson. 2016. Women and Education: Qualifications, Skills and Technology. In Women in Canada: A Gender-based Statistical Report. Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Canada. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89--503-x/2015001/ article/14640-eng.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Allan Fowler. 2016. Informal STEM Learning in Game Jams, Hackathons and Game Creation Events. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events (GJH&GC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 38--41. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897179Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Sarah Fox. 2015. Feminist Hackerspaces as Sites for Feminist Design. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 341--342. https://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2764771Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sarah Fox, Amanda Menking, Stephanie Steinhardt, Anna Lauren Hoffmann, and Shaowen Bardzell. 2017. Imagining Intersectional Futures: Feminist Approaches in CSCW. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 387--393. https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3022665Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Sarah Fox, Rachel Rose Ulgado, and Daniela Rosner. 2015. Hacking Culture, Not Devices: Access and Recognition in Feminist Hackerspaces. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 56--68. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675223Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Olga Goriunova. 2017. The Lurker and the Politics of Knowledge in Data Culture. International Journal of Communication 11 (2017), 17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Paul Graham. 2010. Hackers & painters: big ideas from the computer age (1. [paperback] ed ed.). O'Reilly, Beijing. OCLC: 705649411.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Jonathan Grudin. 1988. Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. In Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work - CSCW '88. ACM Press, Portland, Oregon, United States, 85--93. https://doi.org/10.1145/62266.62273Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Eva Guérin, Elena Bales, Shane Sweet, and Michelle Fortier. 2012. A meta-analysis of the influence of gender on self-determination theory's motivational regulations for physical activity. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne 53, 4 (2012), 291--300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030215Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Colleen R. Hall-Patton. 2008. Quilts and everyday life. In Studies in Symbolic Interaction. Vol. 31. Emerald (MCB UP ), Bingley, 145--162. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1016/S0163--2396(08)31008--4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Sang-Yeal Han, Jaeheung Yoo, Hangjung Zo, and Andrew P. Ciganek. 2017. Understanding Makerspace Continuance. Telemat. Inf. 34, 4 (July 2017), 184--195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.02.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Emily M. Hastings, Farnaz Jahanbakhsh, Karrie Karahalios, Darko Marinov, and Brian P. Bailey. 2018. Structure or Nurture?: The Effects of Team-Building Activities and Team Composition on Team Outcomes. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 1--21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274337Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Xavier Ho. 2016. The Enlightened Jammer: Intrinsic Drives for Game Jam Participations. In Proceedings of DiGRAA 2016: Tensions. DiGRA, Melbourne, Australia, 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Nathaniel Hudson, Celena Alcock, and Parmit K. Chilana. 2016. Understanding Newcomers to 3D Printing: Motivations, Workflows, and Barriers of Casual Makers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 384--396. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858266Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Dr Janette Hughes. 2017. Meaningful Making: Establishing a Makerspace in Your School or Classroom. In What Works? Research into Practice. Ontario Ministry of Education, Toronto, Canada, 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Farnaz Jahanbakhsh, Wai-Tat Fu, Karrie Karahalios, Darko Marinov, and Brian Bailey. 2017. You Want Me to Work with Who?: Stakeholder Perceptions of Automated Team Formation in Project-based Courses. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17. ACM Press, Denver, Colorado, USA, 3201--3212. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3026011Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Silvia Lindtner, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2016. Reconstituting the Utopian Vision of Making: HCI After Technosolutionism. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 1390--1402. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858506Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Kristi Loeffelholz. 2014. Quilting in America 2014 Survey. Market Research report. F+W, A Content + eCommerce Company. http://kqimageserver.com.s3.amazonaws.com/digitaldownloads/compilations/2pageQIA14.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Ioanna Lykourentzou, Robert E. Kraut, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Team Dating Leads to Better Online Ad Hoc Collaborations. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing - CSCW '17. ACM Press, Portland, Oregon, USA, 2330--2343. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998322Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Maxigas. 2012. Hacklabs and Hackerspaces: Tracing Two Genealogies. Journal of Peer Production 2 (2012). http: //peerproduction.net/issues/issue-2/peer-reviewed-papers/hacklabs-and-hackerspaces/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Monica M. McGill, Adrienne Decker, and Amber Settle. 2015. Does Outreach Impact Choices of Major for Underrepresented Undergraduate Students?. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 71--80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2787622.2787711Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Janis Lena Meissner, Angelika Strohmayer, Peter Wright, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2018. A Schnittmuster for Crafting Context-Sensitive Toolkits. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 151, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173725Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Janis Lena Meissner, John Vines, Janice McLaughlin, Thomas Nappey, Jekaterina Maksimova, and Peter Wright. 2017. Do-It-Yourself Empowerment as Experienced by Novice Makers with Disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM Press, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 1053--1065. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663. 3064674Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Michael Muller. 2011. Feminism asks the "Who" questions in HCI. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (Sept. 2011), 447--449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.02.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Michael Muller, David R Millen, N Sadat Shami, and Jonathan Feinberg. 2010. We are all Lurkers: Toward a Lurker Research Agenda. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Supporting group work. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 201--210.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Dawn Nafus. 2012. 'Patches don't have gender': What is not open in open source software. New Media & Society 14, 4 (2012), 669--683. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811422887 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811422887Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Nordicity. 2015. Entertainment Software Association of Canada: Canada's Video Game Industry in 2015. Technical Report. ESAC. http://theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ESAC-Video-Games-Profile-2015-FINAL.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Reena Pau, Wendy Hall, and Su White. 2007. Women in computing: how does experience influence self-perception of computing careers? ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 39, 3 (2007), 349. https://doi.org/10.1145/1268784.1268919Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Chester Pierce. 1970. Offensive Mechanisms. In The Black Seventies, Floyd B Barbour (Ed.). Porter Sargent Publishers, Boston, MA, USA, 265--282.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Emily Porter, Chris Bopp, Elizabeth Gerber, and Amy Voida. 2017. Reappropriating Hackathons: The Production Work of the CHI4Good Day of Service. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 810--814. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025637Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Andrew K. Przybylski, C. Scott Rigby, and Richard M. Ryan. 2010. A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology 14, 2 (2010), 154--166. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019440Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Annika Richterich. 2017. Hacking events: Project development practices and technology use at hackathons. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 0, 0 (may 2017), 135485651770940. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517709405Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Daniela K. Rosner and Sarah E. Fox. 2016. Legacies of craft and the centrality of failure in a mother-operated hackerspace. new media & society 18, 4 (2016), 1461444816629468. http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/02/23/ 1461444816629468.abstractGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Daniela K. Rosner, Samantha Shorey, Brock R. Craft, and Helen Remick. 2018. Making Core Memory: Design Inquiry into Gendered Legacies of Engineering and Craftwork. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174105Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Mary Beth Rosson, John M. Carroll, and Hansa Sinha. 2011. Orientation of Undergraduates Toward Careers in the Computer and Information Sciences: Gender, Self-Efficacy and Social Support. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 11, 3 (Oct. 2011), 1--23. https://doi.org/10.1145/2037276.2037278Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Richard M Ryan. 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of personality and social psychology 43, 3 (1982), 450. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.43.3.450Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Orit Shaer, Lauren Westendorf, Nicholas A. Knouf, and Claudia Pederson. 2017. Understanding Gaming Perceptions and Experiences in a Women's College Community. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 1544--1557. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025623Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Andrew Sleigh, Hannah Stewart, and Kathleen Stokes. 2015. Open dataset of UK makerspaces: a user's guide. Technical Report. Nesta, London, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Peter A Smith and Clint Bowers. 2016. Improving Social Skills through Game Jam Participation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 8--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897172Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Thomas Smith, Simon J. Bowen, Bettina Nissen, Jonathan Hook, Arno Verhoeven, John Bowers, Peter Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2015. Exploring Gesture Sonification to Support Reflective Craft Practice. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 67--76. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702497Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Katta Spiel. 2017. Eluding Experiences: The Broken Promises of Player Experience Questionnaires. (2017). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unbWxoe_0wE Games Institute Invited Speaker Series.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Thomas Steinke, Max Linsenbard, Elliot Fiske, and Foaad Khosmood. 2016. Understanding a Community: Observations from the Global Game Jam Survey Data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, 15--21. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897173Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Angelika Strohmayer and Janis Meissner. 2017. "We had tough times, but we've sort of sewn our way through it": the partnership quilt. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students 24, 2 (Dec. 2017), 48--51. https://doi.org/10.1145/3155128Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Nick Taylor, Ursula Hurley, and Philip Connolly. 2016. Making Community: The Wider Role of Makerspaces in Public Life. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '16. ACM Press, Santa Clara, California, USA, 1415--1425. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858073Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Austin Toombs, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2014. Becoming makers: Hackerspace member habits, values, and identities. Journal of Peer Production 5 (2014), 8. http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-5-shared-machine-shops/ peer-reviewed-articles/becoming-makers-hackerspace-member-habits-values-and-identities/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Austin L. Toombs. 2017. Hackerspace Tropes, Identities, and Community Values. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '17. ACM Press, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 1079--1091. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064760Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Ding Wang, Nick Dunn, and Paul Coulton. 2015. Grassroots maker spaces: a recipe for innovation?. In 11th European Academy of Design Conference (EAD '15). The European Academy of Design, France, 10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Gayna Williams. 2014. Are you sure your software is gender-neutral? interactions 21, 1 (2014), 36--39. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2524808Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Makers and Quilters: Investigating Opportunities for Improving Gender-Imbalanced Maker Groups

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader
          About Cookies On This Site

          We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

          Learn more

          Got it!