Article proposes a critique of a policy or practice with specific action proposals or suggestions.
Article follows conventions of academic research article e.g. position in literature, cited sources, and claimed contribution.
Article is based on developments that have not yet occurred.
Article is based on formal logic or mathematical technique.
Language quality: 2/2*
Standard of English expression in article is excellent.
Scope of debate:2/2
Article addresses an issue which is widely known and debated.
Most related sources are mentioned in article [this is an invitation to careful selection rather than a demonstration of prowess in citation collection i.e. apt and representative choices made in source citations].
Logical flow: 1.5/2*
Ideas are well organised in article.
The argument presented in article is new.
Review impact: 1/2
The article has been significantly changed as a result of the review process.
Reviewers indicate their appreciation of the article in the form of a 50 word statement.
The insightful paper draws on “gambiarra” practices in Brazil and claims that makerspaces should embrace social inclusion at a greater extent in order to empower makers in building alternative socio-technical scripts. Two promising research agendas are outlined: The analysis of linkages between non-institutionalized making and institutionalized practices at makerspaces and the use of Akrich’s theory on the “de-scription” of technology to think about making.
This article discuss the potentials and challenges of maker spaces in São Paulo City (Brazil) to address social inclusion and sustainability policies. It provides a good comprehensive analysis of the literature debate. Through the empirical analysis of a specific maker space, the authors are able to highlight relevant problems and challenges towards more inclusive and sustainable maker spaces strategic policies.