0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views4 pages

Analytic Memo: Learning in Makerspace

The document details observations made at the NYU Makerspace through a social constructivist lens, focusing on collaborative learning experiences among students. Key findings highlight the importance of peer interactions, informal mentoring, and the role of guiding questions in facilitating problem-solving and critical thinking. Observations indicate that collaboration and shared knowledge significantly enhance the learning process in this environment.

Uploaded by

sx2660
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views4 pages

Analytic Memo: Learning in Makerspace

The document details observations made at the NYU Makerspace through a social constructivist lens, focusing on collaborative learning experiences among students. Key findings highlight the importance of peer interactions, informal mentoring, and the role of guiding questions in facilitating problem-solving and critical thinking. Observations indicate that collaboration and shared knowledge significantly enhance the learning process in this environment.

Uploaded by

sx2660
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Name:

Analytic Memo – Observing Learning at NYU Makerspace

Theoretical Lens: Social Constructivist

Date:

I started my observations at the NYU Makerspace this week and I am still


working out a plan for which times of day make the most sense for
observing, based on what I have seen so far. I have conducted two
observations that were 1 hour each. Since I am taking a social constructivist
lens, I am thinking about learning as a socially-mediated experience. I went
into the observation with these guiding questions in mind, but I also wanted
to keep an open mind for what may emerge from my observations.

Guiding Questions:

- What kinds of questions facilitate social interaction among learners in


the NYU makerspace? To what extent do these questions seem to
promote reflection and critical thinking?
- What kinds of peer collaborations happen in the NYU makerspace? Are
these different from the teacher-led/facilitator-led collaborations?
- How does each person participate in the NYU makerspace? Are there
differences I observe based on social and cultural backgrounds (e.g.,
gender, race or ethnicity, age)?

Reflections after initial observations

- Collaboration is happening frequently in the NYU Makerspace and


seems to play an important role in problem solving
- Direct communication and feedback is helpful for conversations to
move forward
- More experienced learners tend to guide people who are newer to the
makerspace or to the activities learners are engaging in, this reminds
me an informal mentoring systems

Thick Description of What I Observed/ Learning

A group of learners are sitting around a round table in the NYU Makerspace.
Fluorescent lights illuminated the sprawling room, which was lined with 3D
printers quietly whirring, laser cutters resting, and shelves stacked high with
spools of wires and electronics. Five students were gathered around a large
workbench covered in papers and parts of a remote-controlled drone.

The air smelled a bit like burnt plastic and one student (a girl, possibly an
undergraduate) was hunched over the table, doing something with a circuit.
Another student wearing a faded NYU Engineering hoodie (male, possibly an
undergraduate), was tinkering with a small propeller. The third student
(female, possibly an undergraduate) carefully watched the other student’s
movements with the propeller. The fourth student (female, possibly a
graduate student mentor) seems to be the lead of the project and was
talking to the fifth student (male, possibly and undergraduate) about the
design of the drone.

The five students collaborated frequently, with periods of individual work.


About 20 minutes into the session, one student sighed and pushed back from
the table when they were stuck, saying "Ugh, this keeps failing the power-up
test. I have no idea what is happening." Then the leader of the group said
"Did you check the ripple current tolerance on the datasheet? We talked
about that being a potential issue with this specific battery."

The third student in the NYU Engineering hoodie leaned into the conversation
to say "And maybe try looking at both the input and output? We only did the
input side yesterday." The first student immediately responded saying
"Ohhhhhh, the output side! I completely missed that. Thanks!" This
exchange seemed like a good example of how combined knowledge leads to
meaningful solutions.

Later in the session, the group leader started asking things like "What's the
riskiest variable in this design?" or "How would you deal with this kind of
problem?" Two of the students seemed to have some kind of technical or
design skill sets based on some of their responses. The third student seemed
a little hesitant to engage, maybe she is new to the makerspace or new to
the particular kind of design they are working on? But towards the end of the
observation session, it seemed like the other teammates were encouraging
her by asking open-ended questions like, "What’s your take on the
placement of the antenna? Where do you think it gets the clearest line of
sight?"

Analysis
Claim: Meaningful learning and problem-solving happens when students
work together and share information.

Evidence: The first student's individual problem ("Ugh, this keeps failing the
power-up test. I have no idea what is happening.") was solved with collective
effort. The group leader initiated the process by saying "Did you check the
ripple current tolerance on the datasheet?", and the student in the hoodie
provided the practical, missing physical step "And maybe try looking at both
the input and output? We only did the input side yesterday." The first
student's immediate response "Ohhhhhh, the output side! I completely
missed that. Thanks!" shows the moment the shared knowledge was
internalized, leading to a meaningful progress. This demonstrates how
knowledge is not transferred one-way, but co-constructed among a group of
learners.

Claim: The makerspace environment seems to help people work in their


Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) because it allows less experienced
learners to do things beyond their current independent zone.

Evidence: The group leader acted as a more knowledgeable other who used
scaffolding with questions like, "What's the riskiest variable in this design?"
and "How would you deal with this kind of problem?" Instead of the group
leader taking over and doing the task, they helped the other group member
think about next steps. This kind of interaction helps with reflection and
critical thinking, and helps the learner move past their current comfort zone.
This peer collaboration is different from a teacher-led lecture because it
comes from a shared experience on the project/drone. The makerspace is
organized in a way where there is not one teacher leading everyone on the
same project. Instead, groups work together on shared projects of interest
(or for a class). This kind of peer environment that includes people with
different strengths and areas of knowledge helps people move out what they
can do alone and into their ZPD of “what I can do with help”.

Claim: There seems to be an informal mentoring system in the group’s


interactions, particularly involving the less experienced members.

The interactions within the group show an informal, peer-driven mentoring


system, where the more experienced members guide more novice members
to the activity or the makerspace. This is exemplified by the group leader
when they ask questions such as, "What's the riskiest variable in this
design?" rather than just saying what they think should happen. This gives
everyone a chance to think. When the third student appeared hesitant to
engage, possibly because she is newer or more novice, her teammates
encouraged her participation. By asking an open-ended question like,
"What’s your take on the placement of the antenna? Where do you think it
gets the clearest line of sight?" they provided a point of entry that could
validate her perspective and somewhat scaffold her engagement into the
technical discussion.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Peer collaborations at the NYU Makerspace differ from facilitator-led interactions in that they are more informal and organic, relying on shared experiences and mutual guidance among group members. Unlike structured teacher-led sessions, these interactions allow learners to work together on projects of common interest, leveraging their diverse strengths. This collaborative atmosphere fosters an exchange of ideas where learners co-create solutions and support each other's learning, often through informal mentoring systems .

The NYU Makerspace fosters social constructivist learning by creating an environment where learners engage in collaborative projects and informal peer mentoring. Experienced learners guide novices, helping them work within their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). This involves a process where knowledge is co-constructed through shared experiences and interactions, rather than being transferred in a one-way manner from expert to novice. The use of open-ended questions and encouragement of reflection and critical thinking are intrinsic to this educational approach .

Individual participation in the NYU Makerspace is influenced by factors such as the learner's level of experience, the informal mentoring and support provided by peers, and the collaborative nature of the projects. The open-ended nature of tasks combined with group encouragement helps novices engage more comfortably, while experienced students contribute by leading discussions and assisting peers. Social and cultural factors, such as gender or academic background, might also play a role but were not explicitly detailed in the observations .

The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in the NYU Makerspace is applied through interactions where more knowledgeable peers help less experienced learners tackle tasks they could not perform independently. This is achieved by using guidance and open-ended questions that enable learners to think critically and solve problems with support, thereby extending their cognitive capabilities and moving them beyond their current level of competence .

Questions play a critical role in facilitating learning at the NYU Makerspace by promoting interaction, reflection, and critical thinking among students. Instead of providing direct answers, mentors use open-ended questions to encourage learners to explore concepts and solve problems collaboratively. This approach not only helps in scaffolding learning but also supports the transition of students into engaging in complex discussions and problem-solving activities .

Interactions among diverse learners at the NYU Makerspace promote a shared understanding by bringing together varying perspectives and proficiencies. The environment encourages mixed-experience groups to collaborate, enabling novices to receive guidance while contributing fresh viewpoints. The use of open dialogue and questioning helps integrate knowledge across different areas, leading to a richer, more comprehensive approach to tackling problems .

Evidence suggests the NYU Makerspace supports reflective practices through collaborative problem-solving sessions where learners are prompted to consider multiple variables and potential outcomes through questioning. The group's practice of discussing the riskiest variables or potential improvements exemplifies a focus on reflection, fostering critical thinking and self-assessment as learners evaluate their work and consider alternative strategies .

The document suggests that while social and cultural backgrounds, such as gender or ethnicity, might influence collaboration, the environment of the NYU Makerspace is structured to minimize these differences by fostering an inclusive, supportive, and collaborative atmosphere. The emphasis on peer collaboration and mentorship allows for knowledge sharing and learning beyond cultural barriers, although the specific impacts of these backgrounds were not detailed extensively in the observations .

Group dynamics in the NYU Makerspace contribute to problem-solving through collaborative dialogue and the collective pooling of knowledge. When individuals encounter problems, others are ready to offer insights, suggest alternative approaches, and ask probing questions. These exchanges exemplify how shared knowledge can lead to meaningful solutions, as seen when a student's problem was resolved through group members' various suggestions and analyses, leveraging their different skills and perspectives .

The existence of informal mentoring systems in the NYU Makerspace is supported by observations of group interactions where experienced students guide novices through questioning and shared problem-solving practices. When one student struggled with a problem, others pointed out overlooked aspects and facilitated learning by engaging in discussions rather than providing direct solutions. These interactions illustrate a dynamic where mentoring happens naturally as part of collaborative efforts, fostering a learning culture reliant on peer support .

You might also like