The Workshop Watcher by Sam Asiri

Observing, exploring and reporting on makerspaces Unit 511 - Work Based Learning Critical Reflective Essay MA Interior Design Sam Asiri 295831

Contents 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10.

List of Figures & Tables......................................... 4 Introduction........................................................ 5 Methodology....................................................... 5 The Eldon Production Centre (EPC)......................... 7 Data Collation...................................................... 9 Workshop Visits................................................. 13 Workshop Visits cont......................................... 15 The Business Models.......................................... 17 Conclusion........................................................ 18 Conclusion cont................................................ 19 References........................................................ 20 Appendices....................................................... 21 Appendix A - Proposal Document........................ 21 Appendix B - Digital Log.................................... 26 Appendix C - Data List of makerspaces in the UK.. 27 Appendix D - Tool List for visited makerspaces...... 33

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

01. List of Figures & Tables Figures Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig Fig

1. The Eldon Production Centre - Source: Author 2. Number of Makerspaces in the UK - Source: Author 3. Number of Makerspaces in the England by region - Source: Author 4. Number of Makerspaces in the South of England by county - Source: Author 5. List of Makerspaces in accessible regions of the south of England - Source: Author 6. SO Make It workshop visit - Source: Author 7. Cell Block Studios visit - Source: Author 8. Art Space Portsmouth visit - Source: Author 9. University of Surrey visit - Source: Author 10. Building BloQs Workshop Visit - Source: Author 11. Blackhorse Workshop visit - Source: Author 12. SO Make It membership structure - Source: Author

Tables Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab Tab

1. .Research aim for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A. 2. Original Methodology for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A. 3. Original Objectives for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A. 4. SO Make IT Business Model - Source: Author 5. SO Make IT Business Model - Source: Author 6. Cell Block Studios Business Model - Source: Author 7. Making Space Business Model - Source: Author 8. Art Space Portsmouth Business Model - Source: Author 9. University of Surrey - EARS makespace Business Model - Source: Author 10. Building BloQs Business Model - Source: Author 11. Blackhorse Workshop Business Model - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

02. Introduction The approach to this project was to position myself as an observer in the University of Portsmouth’s Faculty of Creative & Cultural Industries (CCI) making workshop, which is more commonly known as the Eldon Production Centre (EPC). The aim of the project (see Table 1) was to gain an understanding of functionality from an administrative point of view, along with observing how makers functioned in a space that I had full access to, as a prologue to my master’s degree thesis project on developing an open access workshop. My intentions were to spend a good period of time acting as an observer in the EPC, offering any help I could in areas where I possessed elements of skill or knowledge. My position in most projects I engage with include large elements of collaborative working, where knowledge and skills are shared for the good of the project, which is mutually beneficial for all parties involved. The project deviated from its original intentions, but with a positive outcome. Spending less time focused on one space and trying to gain and in-depth understanding of it, allowed me more time and opportunity to explore other spaces similar to the EPC. Once this journey began, the relevance of the EPC became less pertinent to my project, and thus features less heavily than was originally intended. This essay will reflect on the outcomes of my research, evaluate the spaces I have encountered along the way and begin to define my manifesto for the open access workshop I intend on creating.

Basing myself in the EPC to observe how the space functions and investigate ways to make the space more usable and easier to access by students. This would include, but not be limited to, analysing the use of the space, the appropriateness of the furniture provided, the space allocated to certain machinery, the function of the space as a creative hub. Tab 1. Research aim for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A.

03. Methodology • Research & identify relevant spaces around the UK to compare to my base model (the EPC) • Visit as many spaces as possible to establish an understanding of functionality and business models. • Report findings in the form of a digital Blog • Compare the visited spaces and reflect on outcome of visits • Use time lapse video to record the movements around the spaces, and to visualise hots pots of activity in the EPC • GIS mapping of student movements to and from workshop spaces, using GPS tracking. • Comparative analysis of the space with other similar spaces through floor plans and listing equipment. • Interviewing senior technicians from all visited spaces • Photography of spaces to capture the essence of this type of environment. • Student questionnaires to establish if there are any areas of improvement to the processes in place Tab 2. Original Methodology for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A.

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

• Record the footfall of the EPC, analysing peak times, and down times, to ensure the space is functioning to its maximum potential in the most efficient manner • Run a competition to promote the use of the EPC, communicates its values to students • Compare the space to other similar university facilities in the UK • Investigate the process of thinking through making. Gain a greater understanding of the concept by immersing myself in the environment. • Observing and recording methods of making and collaboration between users of the space Tab 3. Original Objectives for the project - Source: Proposal document Refer to Appendix A.

Fig 1. The Eldon Production Centre - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

04. The Eldon Production Centre (EPC) This workshop was intended as my primary research base. A space that is only accessible by CCI students during the hours of 8:30 to 20:00 on weekdays except for Wednesday and Friday. The setup of the space is perfect for creating one off models and prototypes, with a good variety of woodworking tools, a metalworking area, digital fabric printing, laser cutters, 3D printers and a CNC machine. In my proposal I set out a list of objectives and actions I wished to carry out throughout my time of studying the space (see Table 3, p.6) however, this was surprisingly much more difficult to achieve than first anticipated, due to a lack of transparency and cooperation from management at the EPC. From when my proposal application was submitted for review, I encountered a wall of negativity towards my intentions and had to battle for the sign-off I required to carry out this research. Some of the areas I wished to investigate were thought to be too intrusive and potentially upsetting to the staff in the EPC, even though I explained my intentions were purely academic, and with everyoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s best interest at heart. It was surprising for me to see that even though I was offering to help investigate areas of improvement and share some of the experience I have gained in specialist areas such as 3D printing, that I received such negativity.

As the EPC is a university facility set up for students such as myself, I expected to have much more support guidance and transparency to aid and further my academic research. With this in mind I decided to distance myself from the initial objectives, which were based in the EPC, and focus on other areas. A positive outcome from my initial contact at the EPC was a meeting with Steve Jones, a University of Portsmouth CCI business associate, whose focus is on supporting commercial aspects for the faculty by engaging with various business sectors around the city, and to nurture the many creative ideas coming through the University. During our meeting I leaned that Steve was looking at the viability of commercializing the EPC for public access. One key area we discussed was to analyse similar spaces to the EPC and investigate how they operate. Investigating which model could be implemented on a small scale at the EPC, was a key question in shaping the direction of my research.

In truth I could have made more effort by attending the workshop more regularly, but although I had full access to the workshop physically, I did not feel as though I had any backing or support from management to carry out the work I intended.

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Northern Ireland

North England

Scotland

Midlands

England

South England

Wales

118 13

13 79

Fig 2. Number of Makerspaces in the UK - Source: Author adapted (Sleigh, Stewart, & Stokes, 2015)

Fig 3. Number of Makerspaces in the England by region - Source: Author adapted (Sleigh, Stewart, & Stokes, 2015)

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

05. Data Collation Based on the new objective set out from my meeting with Steve Jones, I carried out some Internet research exploring similar sites to the EPC. I discovered a piece of Nesta funded research being conducted by two PHD students who were producing an open data set (Sleigh, Stewart, & Stokes, 2015) describing the current state of makerspaces across the UK. When looking at the sources for the data gathered for the Nesta Project, I noticed that a live Wiki page (“List of Hacker Spaces - HackerspaceWiki”, 2016) had been used, which listed all live hackspaces in the world. I also used this source and added the data to the open data set from the Nesta research. As the Wiki page was live and the Nesta date set was static information, this step was carried out to ensure all the most current listings were added to the spreadsheet.

I used this analysis to narrow down the list of spaces I wished to visit, based on location (only spaces in the south of England could be considered viable due to time and budget constrains), accessibility and type of making space. (see fig.4) As a result of this filtering the following short list was comprised: • • • • • •

The institute of Making - UCL London Blackhorse Workshop - London Building BloQs - London SO Make it - Southampton University of Surrey - Guildford Makerversity - London

The data was then “cleaned” in terms of insuring all the locations were listed correctly, and no duplicates were recorded.

Along side this wide search for workshops, I focused on some local (Portsmouth) studio & art spaces (see fig.5), which I identified as important to visit to use as a comparison to the makerspaces around the country, the studios visited were:

This spreadsheet was an ideal starting point to then narrow down the search criteria and focus on specific areas.

• Cell Block Studio – Portsmouth Historic dockyard • Making Space – Havant • Art Space – Portsmouth

From the long list (see Appendix C) the analysis in figures 2 to 5 were established

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

CAM

GLO

Devon

OXF

BUC

HER

GLO Avon Wiltshire Berkshire Surrey HAM Sussex Dorset

Greater London

Hampshire

Essex

Kent

Cornwall

Devon

Sussex

Wiltshire

Avon

Buckinghamshire

Dorset

Hertfordshire

Surrey

Berkshire

Cambridgeshire

Gloucestershire

Oxfordshire

Essex

Kent

Cornwall

Fig 4. Number of Makerspaces in the South of England by county - Source: Author adapted (Sleigh, Stewart, & Stokes, 2015)

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Greater London • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Blackhorse Workshop Building BloQs C.I.C Camden Town Shed Create Space London Deckspace East London Hackers Fab Lab London FabLab North Greenwich Hub Workshop Imperial College Advanced Hackspace Uni Institute of Making jailmake L-Space Lime wharf Machines Room London Hackspace London Sculpture Workshop machines room made by ore Makerversity Print Club London Redundant Architects Recreation Association Richmond MakerLabs South London Makerspace The London Bike Kitchen The Remakery Turning Earth University College London (UCL) Bainbridge Print Studios Ceramics Studio Co-op East London Print Makers Goldfinger Factory Inky Cuttlefish Studios London Centre for Book Arts London Print Studio Sonsoles Print Studio The Camden Town Shed The Kiln Rooms

Hampshire • • • • •

Iexploit So Make It Southackton Spitfire Fab Lab Surrey & Hampshire Hackspace

Surrey • Tandridge Hackers • The University of Surrey

Local Artist Studios • Artspace Portsmouth • Making Space • Cell Block Studios

Fig 5. List of Makerspaces in accessible regions of the south of England - Source: Author adapted (Sleigh, Stewart, & Stokes, 2015)

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Fig 6. SO Make It workshop visit - Source: Author

Fig 8. Art Space Portsmouth visit - Source: Author

Fig 7. Cell Block Studios visit - Source: Author

Fig 9. University of Surrey visit - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

06. Workshop Visits The most immersive method to fully understand and investigate the working of making spaces, was by viewing the spaces first-hand, this included sketching the layout of the spaces and taking my own photography (see fig 6 to 11) to record the atmosphere and talking to the people who run the workshops. I contacted all the workshops on the shortlist and begin visiting the local spaces first, while I awaited responses from the workshops further afield. The Workshop Watcher Blog http://theworkshopwatcher. tumblr.com lists in detail my notes and experiences when visiting each of the spaces in a report format. I had positive replies from four of the six non-local spaces, and arranged dates to visit them. The two nonresponsive organizations were, Makerversity and The Institute of Making at UCL, both of which offer open day tours, which unfortunately did not fit in with my schedule. I still intend on visiting these sites at a later stage to further my research. On the plus side, I did have the chance to visit two workshops in London; Building BloQs, which featured on the BBC news with the Mayor of London Boris Johnson advocating the space for its innovative setup, and Blackhorse workshop which is notable due to its inception by the 2015 Turner Prize winners Assemble. The mix of spaces I visited was adequate to gain a good understanding of how they all function, and gave great insight into the variety of business models being implemented in these spaces.

As expected the artist studio spaces did have a different feel about them with a more traditional approach to how the studios were set up and run. This proved to be an interesting contrast to how the modern makerspaces are created. Visiting the makerspace workshops has abolished my preconception of how they are set up and run. It was my assumption that the bigger and more established the organization, the cleaner, more organized and structured the space would be. What I have found is that they all have a large element of fluidity to how the space is used and a freedom to express creation in whatever necessary form. The spaces are adaptable, and cater to their members needs in the best possible way. They welcome and encourage collaborative working facilitating this in whatever way possible. The spaces are generally much messier than I imagined, with large racks of storage housing pieces of unfinished projects, scrap material and acquired tools & equipment. These materials act as a source of inspiration for future projects and mediums for playing with and repairing. When in a space like SO Make It, I feel it would be impossible to spend time there and not want to pick something up to tinker with. The other element I enjoyed about SO Make It in particular, was the friendly community feel in the space. When visiting everyone was interested in what we were doing and enjoyed sharing what they were working on in a high level of detail. This community feel extended to the way they worked together, from which moments of inspiration were triggered by each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inquisitive nature

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Fig 10. Building BloQs Workshop Visit - Source: Author

Fig 11. Blackhorse Workshop visit - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

06. Workshop Visits cont.... The community aspect was less apparent in the more traditional studios like Artspace Portsmouth and Making Space where the studios were split into individual rooms. The artists I spoke to were content with working alone and saw their space as a place of escape and focus. There was no communal area and the only time people saw each others work, was by invitation to the artist studio space, or during the public exhibition days. There is no right or wrong way of doing things in these spaces. There are rules in place to control the large number of users, but there is always a way of achieving your ambition, and by having many other like-minded people working under one roof, there is what seems to be an infinite amount knowledge and skill to make the seemingly impossible, possible.

By working together in a multi- disciplined workshop the design process was accelerated, with both sets of makers gaining financially and all parties benefiting in terms of time saving. The quality of the work was also insured to be of a high standard, as the maker had the choice of which metalworker to work with and knowing the standard of their work due to them working in the same space. A comparison chart of available equipment was put together to highlight the different making ability in each of the visited workshops (Table 4) is a summery of the full equipment list found in Appendix D. Blackhorse Workshop

Metalwork

Misc

Paint

Plastics

3 2

1 1

7 1

Radio Equipment

Woodwork Grand Total

Building BloQs

Electronics

Printing

Surrey Uni

SO Make IT

Digital Fabrication Furniture

EPC

Ceramics

Making Space

Cell Block

Equipment Category

Art Space

When visiting Building BloQs, I was shown an example of collaborative working in the form of a table. The maker specialized in bespoke design using traditional woodworking tools, but the project he was working on required a steel substructure, which he had no experience in working with. I was informed that to achieve the finished article, the maker discussed his project with his fellow workshop members over lunch in the on site cafĂŠ, where metal workers were present and offered to help with the steel element. They started on the designs and had a physical prototype in place by the end of the day. This could then be offered up against the wooden element of the table to ensure a good fit. Slight adjustments were made to the design, and the finished piece was completed by the end of the week. This was a process that traditionally would have involved contacting external

sources to carry out the metalwork, costing the maker both time and money just to get the first manifestation of the design without testing it against the wooden element.

Tab 4. SO Make IT Business Model - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Business Model: Set up as a Non Profit organisation, and operate the space on a pay as you see fit membership basis. Members tend to pay between £15-£20 a month. Tab 5. SO Make IT Business Model - Source: Author

Business Model: University run project on a membership basis for studio/desk space. Information on the fee is currently unavailable. There option to Share cost with other business to take am entire cell, which helps startups and encourages collaborations. Tab 6. Cell Block Studios Business Model - Source: Author

Business Model: 2 year fixed term contract for studio users, £200 per month plus bills. Studios are do as you want but leave as you find. Tab 7. Making Space Business Model - Source: Author

Business Model: members pay £6.25 per square foot per month rent, plus a £20 a month. Access to members only.

Tab 8. Art Space Portsmouth Business Model - Source: Author

Business Model: University led, no fees other that a £5 yearly fee for key fob. Access is given to all members who are part of the Electronics and Amateur Radio Society (EARS) Tab 9. University of Surrey - EARS makespace Business Model - Source: Author

Business Model: Pay As you Go - cashless on site system, members buy / trade / earn credits to “purchase” time on machinery or work-bays. 1 credit = £1 Fabrication Bay 7.5m2 Fabrication Bay 12m2 Additional Worker Spray Booth half day Spray Booth full day Laser Cutter per hour + Technician per hour Storage Small per day Storage Medium per day Storage Large per day

24 Credits - per day 36 Credits - per day 18 Credits 35 Credits 70 Credits 25 Credits 50 Credits 1 Credits 2 Credits 3 Credits

Tab 10. Building BloQs Business Model - Source: Author

Pay As you Go - bookable workspace from ½ a day upwards. The space also offers courses and has a cafe all of which also generate income. Workshop day rates ½ Day - £15 1 day - £20 1 month - £175 6 months - £750 12 months - £1200 Studio space is also rentable for £230-275 per month. Inductions are also charged at: Wood level 1 £15 - Level 2 £50 Metal £40 Tab 11. Blackhorse Workshop Business Model - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

07. The Business Models During the research of various workshops and makerspaces, the most common model being implemented, is the membership fee model. Members pay a fee for access to the facilities ranging from as little as ÂŁ5 a month to ÂŁ36 per day. This is dependent on the type of equipment available, access times and technical assistance. Most of the spaces also offered a Studio desk option allowing members full access to the building at all times and a more private workspace to set up as their own. The rates for this option were also variable on average is was ÂŁ200 per month.

The most radical model encountered was SO Make It in Southampton. Their model was based on trust with their members. There was no mandatory membership fee, but a voluntary fee of any value considered fair for usage. The model apparently works as the non profit organization has been running for over three years. They gain alternate funding through sponsorship from the local council and local businesses for specific events and workshops they run. This open approach creates a friendly community and members often pay more than is required on a regular monthly basis, as they see it as their social space as well as making space.

Another source of income for these spaces were the teaching / workshop element. Evening courses are set up for members of public wanting to learn a new skill or wanting to gain experience on machinery which leads to them becoming full members at the space. Often it is members who run the teaching sessions acting as a shared a source of income for the establishment and the member. Materials shops were also available in most of the workshops making it easy for makers to access all the necessary materials for the work at hand. This would only prove to be a minor source of income, as the materials are generally sold for close to trade cost.

Fig 12. SO Make It membership structure - Source: Author

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

08. Conclusion From this research i can conclude that a more open access approach by the university workshop and ability to share information more freely, would be beneficial to all parties involved. Based on general conversations with students in other departments, most students from across the University are not aware of the existence of the EPC, which is an amazing facility to have and would be much sought after by wide variety of students and members of the public. As a starting point extending access to students from different faculties; alumni students and staff could be considered. Extended opening hours for public access at the weekends would also prove to be beneficial. This could be achieved with a small membership fee, with university Students and Alumni having preferential rates to public members, this would act as a way to generate more income to offset against the cost of opening the facility at those times. The workshop’s busiest periods are weeks leading up to student hand in dates and exhibitions, these dates can be closed to “external” members with priority for space given to CCI students. I have witnessed other times during the year where the workshop has been empty. Based on various conversations with university staff, students and public sources, a more open approach would generally help improve the attitude towards the EPC and help maintain and improve its occupancy levels during times which are currently considered “off peak”. If students are not using the space during these times, then it seems the ideal time to open access to the public and charge a premium for it. 18

The studio spaces visited in Portsmouth were fully occupied, with waiting lists of up to a year, so the demand for space to create is prominent. By working with stakeholders and the local community to create a recognized makerspace in the city, the potential for new collaborations creating new ideas and innovation could help establish the university as a resource of great importance in the production of new creative businesses. The university currently does this in the form of the Innovation space & Cell Block studios, but these are spaces that are not setup for making & building. The current research and data that is being produced is extremely useful in identifying the energy behind the maker movement in the UK. But this information is based on having some knowledge of what a makerspaces is, and an awareness that the maker movement is happening. We see the materialization of business incubation hubs across cities that are set up for similar reasons to makerspaces. But these spaces are focused on business models and accelerated financial growth. Makerspaces focus on the fabrication aspect of a business, giving individuals the opportunity to accelerate innovative ideas through making and prototyping. This type of space can also act as a vehicle for new creations for the large community of local artists who are situated in and around the city. They have access to studio spaces in the form of ArtSpace Portsmouth, and Making space. However these are set up for artist. By giving access to the variety of tool available in the EPC, the University can aid in inspiring artists to create pieces they

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

08. Conclusion cont... may not have considered possible previously. In a study by Dow and Klemmer, it was found that designers who used physical models in their design Iterations outperformed those who did not use physical models. Industries employ prototyping as an integral part of the design process. For example, Toyota uses physical prototyping in their design process in order to avoid manufacturing defective parts. (Barrett, Pizzico, Levy, & Nagel, 2015). Why should this opportunity be limited to those fortunate enough to attend a University that has these facilities? And why is the University not using its presences in the city to make these prospects happen? This research project has aided in uncovering important new questions that will shape the ethos and design proposals for my thesis project.

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

09. References Art Space Web Site >> Membership. (2016). Artspace. co.uk. Retrieved 11 May 2016, from http://www.artspace. co.uk/?page_id=113 Barrett, T., Pizzico, M., Levy, B., & Nagel, R. (2015). A Review of University Maker Spaces. In 122nd ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Seattle: American Society for Engineering Education. Hatch, M. (2014). The maker movement manifesto. Ingold, T. (2013). Making. List of Hacker Spaces - HackerspaceWiki. (2016). Wiki. hackerspaces.org. Retrieved 27 January 2016, from https://wiki.hackerspaces.org/List_of_hackerspaces Sleigh, A., Stewart, H., & Stokes, K. (2015). UK makerspaces: the data | Nesta. Nesta.org.uk. Retrieved 27 January 2016, from http://www.nesta.org.uk/ukmakerspaces-data Tools | Blackhorse Workshop. (2016). Blackhorseworkshop.co.uk. Retrieved 11 May 2016, from http://www.blackhorseworkshop.co.uk/tools/ Tools - SoMakeIt. (2016). wiki.somakeit.org.uk. Retrieved 11 May 2016, from https://wiki.somakeit.org.uk/wiki/Tools Workshop - Building BloQs. (2016). Building BloQs. Retrieved 11 May 2016, from http://buildingbloqs.com/ workshop/ 20

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

10. Appendices

Appendix A - Proposal Document

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Version 4

Page

Name of student: Sam Asiri 295831 Date: 15.11.15 Name of Work Organisation: University of Portsmouth EPC Allocated Support Tutor: Project working title: A Study of university based collaborative workshops Complete the following boxes fully before you submit your proposal Questions 7 – 10 require a yes answer 1. What issue do you propose to investigate and why? This research project will be based on the University of Portsmouths Eldon Production Centre (EPC). The EPC is one of at least two workshops at the university, accessible by students to make and build models and small projects. Basing myself in the EPC to observe how the space functions, and investigate ways to make the space more usable and easier to access by students. This would include but not be limited to, analysing the use of the space, the appropriateness of the furniture provided, the space allocated to certain machinery, the function of the space as a creative hub. I believe that some of the booking forms and processes in place, such as the laser cutting application form, could be revamped in order to make it more time efficient for both students and technicians. Some of my time would be spent investigating the processes in place, understanding the reasoning for the methods, and trying to enhance them. I would like to dedicate some time to trying to enhance the function of the 3D printing equipment, and try to promote the use and benefits of the equipment to students. I would also like to try to arrange a “making” competition in the department to promote the space. Also to highlight the importance of collaborative working and knowledge sharing and skill in such a vibrant and exciting space. I would look to set a brief which would encourage the use of the all the equipment available in the space. 2. Explain the links between your topic, the organisation and the academic discipline. What are the key drivers for your investigation? “Maker space’s” are fast becoming popular collaborative workshops, harbouring innovative start up businesses through the use of high quality machinery, enabling individuals and small businesses to produce prototypes batches of product. Shortening the timescale of manufacturing, achieving sales and rapid growth. All this being done in a multidisciplinary space with many innovative minds working collaboratively. It is my belief that this is the future of manufacturing and is a fundamental movement in enhancing the economy and improving individuals opportunities to be creative, and fulfil their ambitions.

University of Portsmouth School of Architecture Work Based Learning Project Proposal/Learning Contract

Version 4

Page

I wish to investigate how these spaces function, and how this atmosphere can be captured and used to benefit the local community. This is relevant to Interior Design, as it is an investigation of the functionality of a space, and analysis of its phenomenology. By involving the community and trying to capture outsiders imaginations, The project would be acting as a motive for improving the city we inhabit, and enhance Portsmouths reputation as a creative hub. 3. List the specific research objectives of your investigation using active verbs Record the footfall of the EPC, analyzing peak times, and down times, to ensure the space is functioning to its maximum potential in the most efficient manner Run a competition to promote the use of the EPC, communicates its values to students Compare the space to other similar university facilities in the UK investigate the process of thinking through making. Gain a greater understanding of the concept by immersing myself in the environment. Observing and recording methods of making and collaboration between users of the space 4. Provide accurate references for the literature you propose to review in order to inform your investigation ie author, year, book/journal article title, publisher and page numbers Tim Ingold, Making Thomas Heatherwick, Making Glenn Adamson, Thinking through Craft Elizabeth KealyMorris, The bookbinding workshop: Making as collaborative pedagogic practice Sanders, E.B.N. (2013) Prototyping for the Design Spaces of the Future. In Valentine, L. (Editor) Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century Graham, H., Hill, K., Holland, T. and Pool, S. (2015). When the workshop is working. Qualitative Research Journal, 15(4), pp.404415.

Version 4

Conduct interviews with workshop senior technicians

Page

Visit other workshops in the university to establish an understanding of how they operate.

From the beginning of teaching block 2, I will spend at least 1 day a week in the EPC to develop and understanding of the function and process of the space.

7. Do you have sufficient organisational support to enable you to complete the Research Project yes or no? 8. Are you confident that you can gain access to the necessary information and people yes or no? 9. Can you comply with ethical standards relating to confidentiality, informed consent and risk assessment – see appendix 10 yes or no? 10. Have you carefully read and understood the areas of assessment which are specified in the research project assessment form and marking matrix (Appendix 2) yes or no? 11. Provide a short plan of action with timescales.

● The availability of time to spend in the EPC while other units are running, while also trying to work part time. Depending on how the time table is structured this could overcome based on good time management. the use of unattended cameras to record data will also help negate the need to be in the space constantly.

● Bureaucracy. Until the issues arise it would be difficult to try to predict how this could be overcome.

● As i wish to evaluate a functioning space and its current processes, there could be a danger of encountering resilience to change “if it aint broke dont fix it” . To overcome this, approaching the subject in a way that highlights the positives of efficiency for all affected parties. Also involving as many people as possible in the process of change, should help make the team feel included and dilute any negativity the project could encounter.

6. What potential difficulties do you anticipate and how will these be overcome?

● Use time lapse video to record the movements around the spaces, and to visualise hotspots of activity in the EPC ● GIS mapping of student movements to and from workshop spaces, using GPS tracking. ● Comparative analysis of the space with other similar spaces through floor plans and listing equipment. ● Interviewing senior technicians from all visited spaces ● Photography of spaces to capture the essence of this type of environment. ● Student questionnaires to establish if there are any areas of improvement to the processes in place

5. What data collection methods do you anticipate using to generate quality relevant data and what is your rationale for that method/s? Justify your sample frame. A literature review is not a research method.

Film the EPC activity over the course of 2 weeks, to establish “hotspots” of activity. 1 week when no deadlines are due a second week when there is a deadline approaching for a particular course, to compare the activity.

Version 4

Page

12. Outcomes. The Unit descriptor lists (Appendix 1). ● 10001500 word proposal (this form) ● Evidence of the work carried out in the workplace (this might be a log) I am considering using a daily web blog to log the activity encountered at the university. Also developing a digital map showing the buildings, equipment and availability. ● 3000 word critical reflective appraisal. Please provide a list of your proposed outcomes, which may vary with the specific project and in consultation with your tutor.

Appendix B - Digital Log To accompany this essay, a digital log in the form of a tumbler blog. A hard copy of the blog was not produced due to the nature of the images, videos and web links available to view. The blog is easily accessible by copying or clicking on the following link: http://theworkshopwatcher.tumblr.com Please note that the blog runs in chronological order starting with the latest entry. To view older posts, navigate to the bottom of the page and click on the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Next Pageâ&#x20AC;? link.

Sam Asiri - 295831 - Unit 511 - Work Based Learning - Critical Reflective Essay

Appendix C - Data List of makerspaces in the UK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Name Makerversity Derby Makers Nottingham Hackspace NorthHACKton Leicester Hackspace Lincoln Hackspace Chelmsford Makerspace Makespace Hitchin Hackspace Herts Hack Space Colchester Hackspace London Hackspace Deckspace South London Makerspace MakerSpace DoES Liverpool Hackspace Manchester Preston Hackspace Chester Hackspace Lunelab BuildBrighton Hackspace So Make It Surrey & Hampshire Hackspace Bristol Hackspace Dorset Constructorium Openshed OxHack Swindon Hackspace fizzPOP Shropshire Hackspace Potteries Hackspace

Location Country London England Derby England Nottingham England Northampton England Leicester England Lincoln England Chelmsford England Cambridge England Hitchin England St Albans England Colchester England London England London England London England Newcastle upon tyne England Liverpool England Manchester England Preston England Chester England Lancaster England Brighton England Southampton England Farnborough England Bristol England Bournemouth England Penzance England Oxford England Swindon England Birmingham England Shropshire England Newcastle-‐under-‐Lyme England

County Greater London Derbyshire

Lincolnshire Essex Cambridgeshire Hertfordshire Hertfordshire Essex Greater London Greater London Greater London

Sussex Hampshire Hampshire Avon Dorset Cornwall Oxfordshire Wiltshire

Staffordshire

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Name TekWizz Malvern Hackspace Leeds Hackspace Sheffield Hardware Hackers and Makers Access Space York Hackspace Farset Labs Edinburgh Hacklab 57North Hacklab The T-‐Exchange Swansea Hackspace LAMM (Lancaster and Morecambe Makers) MusicTechSW GIMPS Becycle Aberdeen MAKE aberdeen OmegaSpace, Schools of Electronics Bangor, Club Innov8 FabLab Belfast, Ashton Centre Farset Labs (Belfast) HackNI(Norn Iron Hacker Scene) Entrepreneurs for the Future Centre (e4f) MakerspaceFY1 (Blackpool) The Dorset Constructorium (Bournemouth/Poole) The Skiff Eagle House Pop-‐Up Furniture Factory Dragonhack (Carmarthen Hackerspace) EPIK kids hackspace Hackspace Cardiff Founders Hub Cardiff Fab Lab Cardiff

Location Coventry Malvern Leeds Sheffield Sheffield York Belfast Edinburgh Aberdeen Findhorn Swansea Lancashire Mullion Aberdare Aberdeen Aberdeen Bangor Barry Belfast Belfast Belfast Birmingham Blackpool Bournemouth Brighton Bristol Carmarthen Canterbury Cardiff Cardiff Cardiff

Country England England England England England England Northern Ireland Scotland Scotland Scotland Wales England England Scotland Scotland Scotland Wales Wales Northern Ireland Northern Ireland Northern Ireland England England England England England Wales England Wales Wales Wales

County Worcestershire

Moray Firth

Cornwall

Dorset Sussex Avon Kent

63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

Name Coderdojo Carmarthen ICMP Medway Cheltenham Hackspace Waiting Room Colchester Makernow -‐ Falmouth University Coventry MakerSpace (Coventry) BEC Fab Lab Egremont Fab Lab Piel View Hackers Pi Cymru FabLabDevon (Exeter) Dundee Makerspace Spitfire Fab Lab (Eastleigh, UK) Fab Lab Ellesmere Port FabLab Essex E-‐Space (Exeter) Chit Electron Club (Glasgow) fablab@strathclyde MAKLAB Making Place High Wycombe Hackspace Ipswich Makerspace Fab Lab Airedale Marie’s Tea Room Makerspace Lancaster Lab Cassius Collective Leigh Virtual Hackspace Fab Lab Liverpool Blackhorse Workshop Building BloQs C.I.C

Location Carmarthen Chatham Cheltenham Colchester Falmouth Coventry Cumbria Cumbria Cumbria Cwmbran Exeter Dundee Eastleigh Ellesmere Port Basildon Exeter Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Hebden Bridge High Wycombe Ipswich Keighley Gravesend Lancaster Langholm Leigh Liverpool London London

Country Wales England England England England England England England England Wales England Scotland England England England England Scotland Scotland Scotland Scotland England England England England England England Scotland England England England England

County Kent Gloucestershire Essex Cornwall

Devon Hampshire Cheshire Essex Devon

Yorkshire Buckinghamshire Suffolk Yorkshire Kent

Lancashire Greater London Greater London

Name 94 Camden Town Shed 95 Create Space London 96 East London Hackers 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123

Fab Lab London FabLab North Greenwich Hub Workshop Institute of Making jailmake L-‐Space London Sculpture Workshop machines room made by ore Print Club London Redundant Architects Recreation Association (RARA) The London Bike Kitchen The Remakery Turning Earth FabLab Nerve Centre Fab Lab Manchester Madlab (Manchester) MKMS Newport Makers Mi Little Pad Norwich Fab Lab Plymouth fablab Pontio (Bangor University) Preston Hackspace rLab -‐ reading hackspace Richmond MakerLabs Salisbury Hackerspace

Location London London London

Country England England England

County Greater London Greater London Greater London

London London London London London London London London London London London London London London Londonderry Manchester Manchester Milton Keynes Newport Newport Norwich Plymouth Bangor Preston Reading Richmond Sailsbury

England England England England England England England England England England England England England England Northern Ireland England England England Wales Wales England England Wales England England England England

Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London

Buckinghamshire

Suffolk Devon

Berkshire Greater London Wiltshire

124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149

Name GIST Lab Technocamps Iexploit Southackton Tandridge Hackers UberVolt LeodisSpace Multi Skills Workshop Lime wharf Machines Room The University of Strathclyde The Shed -‐ The University of Kent University College London (UCL) The University of Surry Imperial College Advanced Hackspace Uni FabLab NorthEast / Sunderland Uni Bainbridge Print Studios Ceramics Studio Co-‐op East London Print Makers Goldfinger Factory Inky Cuttlefish Studios London Centre for Book Arts London Print Studio London Sculpture Workshop Sonsoles Print Studio The Camden Town Shed The Kiln Rooms

Location Sheffield South Wales Southampton Southampton Oxted Swindon West Yorkshire Eastbourne London Strathclyde Canterbury London Guildford London Sunderland London London London London London London London London London London London

Country England Wales England England England England England England England Scotland England England England England England England England England England England England England England England England England

County

Hampshire Hampshire Surrey Wiltshire Sussex Greater London Kent Greater London Surrey Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London Greater London

Appendix D - Tool List for visited makerspaces

Equiptment