, Volume 63, Issue 5, pp 514–520 | Cite as

Is the Maker Movement Inclusive of ANYONE?: Three Accessibility Considerations to Invite Blind Makers to the Making World

  • JooYoung SeoEmail author
Original Paper


The issue this paper addresses is the lack of attention to inclusivity of people with visual impairments in the maker movement. To capture major challenges which blind makers are faced with in makerspaces and to learn how to pursue a more accessible making ecology, three online communities for blind makers (The Blind Arduino Blog; Raspberry VI; and Blind Electronics) have been qualitatively explored based on the autoethnographic approach. As a result, three imperative challenges that need attention in designing inclusive maker tools have been highlighted: (1) inaccessible/undocumented instructions for maker toolkits; (2) a less tangible design of making board; and (3) a lack of multi-sensory modules. Three corresponding practical recommendations drawing from the blind makers’ know-hows along with author’s personal experience as a blind maker, are suggested. This paper contributes to improving the current awareness of accessibility aspects of the maker movement to invite another marginalized group into its discourse.


Accessibility Blind makers Makerspaces Universal design Visual impairments 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

Author of this article declares that he has no conflict of interest.


  1. Brady, T., Salas, C., Nuriddin, A., Rodgers, W., & Subramaniam, M. (2014). MakeAbility: Creating accessible makerspace events in a public library. Public Library Quarterly, 33, 330–347. Scholar
  2. Buccholz, B., Shively, K., Peppler, K., & Wohlend, K. (2014). Hands on, hands off: Gendered access in crafting and electronics practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21, 1–20. Scholar
  3. Buechley, L., & Hill, B. M. (2010). LilyPad in the wild: How hardware’s long tail is supporting new engineering and design communities. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.Google Scholar
  4. Buechley, L., Eisenberg, M., Catchen, J., & Crockett, A. (2008). The lilypad arduino: Using computational textiles to investigate engagement, aesthetics, and diversity in computer science education. In Proceedings of the sigchi conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 423–432). ACM.Google Scholar
  5. Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Display & Design Ideas: DDI, 27, 80–85. Scholar
  6. Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. H37: Using alt attributes on img elements | Techniques for WCAG 2.0. (2008). Retrieved from Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  8. Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hatch, M. (2014). The maker movement manifesto: Rules for innovation in the new world of crafters, hackers, and tinkerers. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  10. IAAP. (2018). About CPACC Certification. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  11. Kafai, Y. B., Lee, E., Searle, K., Fields, D., Kaplan, E., & Lui, D. (2014). A crafts-oriented approach to computing in high school: Introducing computational concepts, practices, and perspectives with electronic textiles. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lighthouse Staff. (2016). Blind arduino monthly meetup (BAMM). [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  13. Maker Media, Inc. (2013). An in-depth profile of makers at the forefront of hardware innovation. In Retrieved from Accessed 19 Oct 2018.Google Scholar
  14. Miele, J. (2015). Blind arduino project. The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  15. Miele, J. (2016). Help—my arduino headers don’t have gaps. [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  16. Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism, 36(2), 1–11.Google Scholar
  17. Perry, K. (2016a). Blind electronics: Blogger introduction. [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  18. Perry, K. (2016b). Blind electronics: Snapping back into electronics. [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  19. Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2014). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14, 505–526. Scholar
  20. Ray, M. A. (n.d.-a). Raspberry VI: About. [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  21. Ray, M. A. (n.d.-b). Raspberry VI: Arduino Hacking from the Command Line. [web log comment]. Retrieved from: Accessed 19 Oct 2018.
  22. Scott, K. A., Sheridan, K. M., & Clark, K. (2014). Culturally responsive computing: Aa theory revisited. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(4), 412–436. Scholar
  23. Seo, J., & Richard, G. T. (2018). Accessibility, making and tactile robotics: Facilitating collaborative learning and computational thinking for learners with visual impairments. In J. Kay & R. Luckin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference of the Learning Sciences (vol. 3, pp. 1755–1757). London: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  24. Seo, J. Y., AlQahtani, M., Ouyang, X., & Borge, M. (2017). Embracing students with visual impairments in CSCL. In B. K. Smith, M. Borge, E. Mercier, K. Y. Lim (Eds.), Making a Difference: Prioritizing Equity and Access in CSCL, 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2017, Volume 2. Philadelphia: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. Snap Circuits ® | Electronic and Educational Toys. (2018). Retrieved from Accessed 19 Oct 2018.

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Learning, Design, and TechnologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations