Search

What does it mean to express Black joy and loving blackness through STEM-rich making? What does it mean for Black youth in community-based, youth-focused makerspaces to express Black joy and loving blackness? We look at how Black youth alongside their facilitators co-create spaces of Black joy through making. These makerspaces are located at two local Boys and Girls Clubs in the US Midwest and the Southeast. Makerspaces are informal sites where youth are encouraged to work collaboratively while building digital and physical artifacts. As two Black female STEM educators working with Black youth we frame our work in critical race theory. Specifically we draw on the tenets of whiteness as property and counter-narratives. Using critical ethnographic methods, we explore the ways in which Black youth produce counter-narratives that disrupt whiteness as property through STEM-rich making. Data sources include fieldnotes; artifacts, such as youth work; interviews; and video recordings. The first vignette highlights how two Black girls navigate choosing and creating characters using Scratch. The second vignette focuses on a brother and sister duo who center their making on family and their shared maker identity. We then discuss the freedoms afforded to youth with flexible co-designed curriculum with facilitators and how we foster open spaces. We address this special issue’s driving question by asking, How do we, as STEM facilitators, counter anti-blackness in/through STEM by fostering space for Black joy with youth in making?

Social quarantine has severely impacted the training of new scientists, but the use of virtual platforms can supplement mentorship, making career development seamless.

Scientific success is mainly supported by mentoring, which often occurs through face-to-face interactions. Changes to the research environment incurred by the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have necessitated mentorship adaptations. Here, we describe how mentors can broaden their mentorship to support trainee growth and provide reassurance about trainee development amid uncertain circumstances.

In the field of adolescent development, the language, theoretical frameworks, methods for collecting and analyzing data, and ways of interpretation that researchers use may advance notions of white supremacy and perpetuate racist ideas. Understanding how researchers study Black girls and women, in particular, is a critical step in working toward the production of science and knowledge that promotes an anti-racist and anti-sexist agenda and centers the voices of historically marginalized adolescents. Accordingly, we engaged in a systematic review (k = 48) with the goal of taking a critical look at how researchers study Black girls and women. Our synthesis of empirical articles from four prominent adolescent research journals published between 2010 and 2020 revealed themes related to (a) a dearth of critical theoretical frameworks, (b) a lack of acknowledgment of the intersectional experiences of Black girls and women, (c) differences in how researchers incorporate ethnic/racial information, (d) the use of a deficit perspective, and (e) the dominance of quantitative designs. We discuss these themes and conclude with recommendations for incorporating critical frameworks and more varied methodologies, issuing a call for adolescent development scholars to take a deeper, asset-based, and more critical approach to studying Black girls and their development.