For this activity we were asked to select a topic of interest and choose two relevant papers. I decided to focus on makerspaces in preparation for assignment 3 in ETL567. First, the two articles are compared, then evaluated through set questions.

Paper 1: Fourie, I & Meyer, A. (2015). What to make of makerspaces. Library Hi Tech, 33(4), 519-525. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-09-2015-0092

Paper 2: Mersand, S. (2021). The state of makerspace research: a review of the literature. TechTrends, 65(2), 174-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00566-5

What to make of makerspaces (Fourie & Meyer, 2015)

The purpose, methodology, findings and research limitations are all clearly stated at the beginning of the article. The article itself is well-organised under clear headings and cites a wide range of supporting research. Research questions are posed and follow-up research ideas are suggested. This paper does not contain any research or data collection from the author, it is a literature review of other research in the area of makerspaces in libraries.

The state of makerspace research: a review of the literature (Mersand, 2021)

Mersand (2021) gives clear definitions of the different types of makerspaces with reference to the literature. The article is also well-organised using clear headings. The method of selection of other research papers is explained clearly. There are also tables included to clearly support the categorisation of the documents to be reviewed, the methodology of each document and the year of publication. There is a clear discussion about the findings of the documents with reference to the literature. The article concludes with final findings and suggestions for further research. The fundings and compliance of ethical standards is also clearly stated.

Which paper was more coherent, consistent and comprehensive in describing the research procedure and finding?

Mersand (2021) was more comprehensive, using tables and describing the findings using supporting literature.

Which paper has a more constructive conclusion?

Again, Mersand (2021) was more constructive as it discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the literature analysed.

Overall, Mersand (2021) gave more insight into makerspaces in libraries by discussing the different types of makerspaces and their application.