Library maker educators rely on both quantitative metrics and qualitative evidence to judge whether their definitions of success are met¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Staff and educators reported using quantitative metrics such as kit usage counts alongside qualitative evidence such as observed passion and curiosity. → Kailea Saplan · Sam Abramovich · Peter Wardrip 2024

Evidence¶

Kailea Saplan · Sam Abramovich · Peter Wardrip 2024¶

Kailea Saplan · Sam Abramovich · Peter Wardrip. (2024). Analyzing properties of success for assessment development in maker-based learning. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10286-1

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Interview finding on what makes success visible: participants named both count-based metrics and in-situ qualitative observations as evidence. The article reports educators "rely on quantitative metrics" and "also rely on qualitative evidence."

"They rely on quantitative metrics, like "How many times [a kit] gets used" and "We had 100 story times," but they also rely on qualitative evidence, "[Patrons are] jumping around, but that passion, that excitement from whatever inspired them is still there…In the midst of them going from here to here and then…there is still curiosity.""

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The intended audience of assessment results, whether internal or external stakeholders, shapes what an assessment for a library makerspace should do — related
• Library staff and maker educators describe success in maker programs through four themes: who demonstrates success, how it is demonstrated, what makes it visible, and with whom it is shared — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The subject of success in library makerspaces is often someone other than the participating patron, such as facilitators or parents — related