1
00:00:01,709 --> 00:00:06,035
[background noise, discussing arrangements]

2
00:00:06,035 --> 00:00:10,868
So, the growing maker movement has recently drawn some social critiques.

3
00:00:11,005 --> 00:00:15,131
As you can see here from this clever send-up of Make magazine by Professor Garnet Hertz

4
00:00:15,146 --> 00:00:16,968
and his book series Critical Making.

5
00:00:17,199 --> 00:00:22,589
For example, just how revolutionary is it to join the Arduino revolution?

6
00:00:22,943 --> 00:00:28,187
There needs to be space, Hertz argues, to study the social, cultural, and political implications of making.

7
00:00:28,309 --> 00:00:32,524
And as evidenced by yesterday's Make-To-Learn symposium, many within the DML community

8
00:00:32,524 --> 00:00:36,070
are committed to broadening participation in DIY activities

9
00:00:36,162 --> 00:00:39,152
for socioeconomically, racially, ethnically diverse youth.

10
00:00:39,214 --> 00:00:44,328
To complement that initiative, I'm here to make a pitch for broadening that focus even further,

11
00:00:44,374 --> 00:00:46,474
to encompass youth with disabilities.

12
00:00:46,581 --> 00:00:49,483
I'm going to talk about what I'm calling a mixed-ability maker culture,

13
00:00:49,545 --> 00:00:52,255
why it's important and how you all can support it.

14
00:00:52,299 --> 00:00:54,116
By mixed-ability maker culture,

15
00:00:54,178 --> 00:00:57,155
I mean a collaborative culture within which people with and without disabilities

16
00:00:57,155 --> 00:01:01,471
can co-create and co-exist as they work to maximize and develop their own skills.

17
00:01:01,717 --> 00:01:06,287
This includes making useful things for people with disabilities, but also getting people with disabilities

18
00:01:06,426 --> 00:01:12,109
involved in making. A mixed-ability maker culture is one that embraces the differences

19
00:01:12,309 --> 00:01:16,643
not only between people who do and do not identify as having a disability,

20
00:01:16,767 --> 00:01:20,982
but also the wide range of differences that exist among people with disabilities themselves.

21
00:01:21,028 --> 00:01:22,890
So now why this this important?

22
00:01:22,966 --> 00:01:26,259
So the U.S. Department of Education reports that there are 6 million kids with disabilities

23
00:01:26,259 --> 00:01:31,220
in the public education system. And so while those 6 million experience disability on an individual level,

24
00:01:31,220 --> 00:01:36,721
our collective institutions and social practices directly impact opportunities for participation.

25
00:01:36,905 --> 00:01:40,505
Disability isn't an isolated social justice issue either.

26
00:01:40,690 --> 00:01:45,255
It intersects with race, ethnicity, income, gender, sexuality in complex ways.

27
00:01:45,408 --> 00:01:49,186
And those complex intersections and the challenges they pose for young people

28
00:01:49,248 --> 00:01:51,128
merits more attention among all of us.

29
00:01:51,205 --> 00:01:56,054
Historically, as you can see here, there has been a lot of hope around new technologies being an equalizer

30
00:01:56,054 --> 00:01:59,073
for youth with disabilities. At the same time, though,

31
00:01:59,165 --> 00:02:01,950
kids with disabilities are rarely portrayed as cultural producers.

32
00:02:02,058 --> 00:02:06,307
And special education has received little attention at DML over the years.

33
00:02:06,307 --> 00:02:12,246
The irony is that the technological world as we know it has been fundamentally shaped

34
00:02:12,337 --> 00:02:15,854
by youth with disabilities who found their way around complex systems.

35
00:02:15,901 --> 00:02:21,127
For example, take phone phreaking, which was essentially computer hacking before there were computers.

36
00:02:21,127 --> 00:02:26,683
In the 1950s, blind youth like Joe Engressia were the first to discover that they could hack the telephone system

37
00:02:26,683 --> 00:02:29,439
using perfect pitch to trigger automated switches.

38
00:02:29,439 --> 00:02:32,959
They became central figures in the phone phreaking movement and in hacking history,

39
00:02:32,959 --> 00:02:36,726
influencing the likes of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak.

40
00:02:36,726 --> 00:02:42,291
Maker culture, and specifically 3D printing, also have huge implications for assistive technology.

41
00:02:42,291 --> 00:02:48,190
Customized, lightweight, easily-replacable parts, such as this 3D-printed brace, open up new possibilities

42
00:02:48,190 --> 00:02:53,724
for mobility and experience. So, cultivating a mixed ability maker culture is important

43
00:02:53,724 --> 00:02:58,775
because on one side, youth with disabilities are part of the past, present, and future of making.

44
00:02:58,775 --> 00:03:03,994
And at the same time, they have been,

45
00:03:04,087 --> 00:03:07,463
their participation has been undervalued in society and understudied in the DML community.

46
00:03:07,570 --> 00:03:10,439
So, then how can we support a more mixed-ability maker culture?

47
00:03:10,439 --> 00:03:15,191
First, we can learn about making and hacking from people with disabilities themselves.

48
00:03:15,191 --> 00:03:22,094
I highly recommend checking out ZebredaMakesItWork.com, a series of videos and blogposts

49
00:03:22,094 --> 00:03:27,103
created by a woman named Zebreda Dunham. Mixed ability maker culture recognizes

50
00:03:27,103 --> 00:03:29,478
that different bodies produce different types of knowledge.

51
00:03:29,570 --> 00:03:32,607
And I can't speak on behalf of people with disabilities,

52
00:03:32,776 --> 00:03:39,059
but as an ally, I think that it's important to amplify the voices and the innovations of people like Zebreda.

53
00:03:39,059 --> 00:03:42,816
Second, you can support mixed ability maker culture

54
00:03:42,877 --> 00:03:45,134
by following the lead of those who already building mixed-ability maker spaces.

55
00:03:45,242 --> 00:03:50,392
Like the organization DIYAbility in New York City which is co-run by John Schimmel of NYU's ITP department

56
00:03:50,392 --> 00:03:53,609
and Holly Cohen of NYU's Occupational Therapy department.

57
00:03:53,748 --> 00:03:59,674
You can also collaborate with others. For example, at this year's Interaction Design and Children conference in New York City

58
00:03:59,751 --> 00:04:04,231
there's going to be a workshop on evaluating accessibility and fabrication tools.

59
00:04:04,369 --> 00:04:09,036
So, not designed specifically for kids with disabilities, tools like Makey Makey offer

60
00:04:09,036 --> 00:04:12,691
whole new ways of working with technology. And I am personally at the early stages of a project

61
00:04:12,691 --> 00:04:17,525
looking at how parents, therapists, and special education teachers rewire and hack toys

62
00:04:17,525 --> 00:04:21,897
to make them more accessible, as opposed to way more expensive other assistive technologies.

63
00:04:21,897 --> 00:04:25,493
I'm interested in how accessibility becomes hackcessibility.

64
00:04:25,493 --> 00:04:31,293
So, novel directions for the maker movement require new ways of looking at maker culture.

65
00:04:31,293 --> 00:04:37,327
And mixed-ability maker culture, is one committed to an equitable, ethical, and sustainable democratic future.

66
00:04:37,327 --> 00:04:41,890
It requires us to look closer not only at the materiality of making, but also the social context

67
00:04:41,890 --> 00:04:44,826
that surrounds participation in and exclusion from it.

68
00:04:44,826 --> 00:04:48,693
To repeat, with disabilities, making can be both a hobby and a necessity.

69
00:04:48,693 --> 00:04:52,691
And through the lens of mixed-ability maker culture, I'm hoping to prompt a serious discussion

70
00:04:52,691 --> 00:04:59,620
about what we talk about and what we don't talk about when we talk about maker culture.

71
00:04:59,725 --> 00:05:02,000
Thanks! [applause]