Online First

Papers on the maker movement have been published intensively in Korea since 2014, and they have used the keywords of “infinite imagination room”, “makerspaces” and “shared economy.” Previous research can be divided into studies on concept analysis, studies on operation model and plan, studies on case studies within the infinite imagination room, and studies on applications of makerspaces according to the type of library, among others.

First, Ahn, Choi, and Noh (2014) studied the concept of makerspaces and redefined the concept of introducing infinite creative space, the need of introduction and the role of existing space, and tried to find examples of programs that are appropriate to operate. In addition, the concepts of infinite creative space, development processes of infinite creativity space, implications derived from domestic and foreign materials, directions of utilization of infinite creation space were derived by using literature survey methods and case study methods. In addition, there were further suggestions made for a story creation program, a thematic infinite creation program reflecting the characteristics of the library, an expert mentoring program, a professional consulting program, various educational programs, a patent application and a startup support program. Hong and Park (2015) analyzed the current state of the library’s infinite creation space and co–working space, and presented conceptual modeling and substantive modeling based on this analysis.

As a study on the operating model and plans for makerspaces, Noh (2014) proposed the possibility of infinite utilization of a library’s infinite creation space by analyzing domestic and foreign cases and previous research papers. Yoo (2015) examined existing domestic and foreign cases of creative cultures centered around ideas of creation space and preliminary research. He presented the idea creation room within an infinite imagination room which opened central to Seoul and which was different from other idea creation spaces central to living cultures in relation to their concept, meaning and characteristics. Through this, he tried to examine achievements and limitations. After that, Yoo and Lee (2017) analyzed characteristics of the creation space of living culture oriented cultural contents, which is the creative environment of an infinite imagination room, and suggested ways of activating the living space oriented cultural contents creation space as the creative environment of the region. Through research, it was discovered that there is a need for a guide to convey clear goals; such as, a mission statement of the creative space, the charter, etc., in terms of the point of operation in order to revitalize the creation space of life culture contents including an infinite imagination room, and the need to provide opportunities for university and private organizations to participate in practical and professional areas under the leadership of public institutions and the government.

In addition, Kim et al. (2016) studied the need and purpose of the infinite imagination room considering environmental factors and human factors within the Jungwon Library located at the global campus of Konkuk University, thereby presenting model selection, annual program planning, space designs, construction of operational experts, network construction, public relations strategies, and finally, performance management stages to evaluate these issues.

As a result of analyzing previous research performed related to makerspaces, numerous findings were reported. First, research on makerspaces’ activities is still underway in the conceptualization process. Second, there has been lots of research on the construction model and activation plan as another step taken toward conceptualization. Third, research is being conducted to apply makerspaces to individual libraries. Fourth, research is being carried out to expand maker activities centered on public libraries to other types of libraries. However, we could not find any research on the makerspaces’ facilitator, and the users’ perceptions and current situations.

The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism conducted surveys of public library librarians from September to October 2017 in order to collect opinions on the creation and operation of public library makerspaces. In this study, 165 survey questionnaires were analyzed.

According to the results of the first questionnaire analysis performed on 8 metropolitan areas including Seoul, Busan, and Incheon as well as 9 provinces including Gyeonggi and Gangwon, there were no significant differences between the regions. The results of this study are as follows. The areas were divided into metropolitan areas and non–metropolitan areas. In studying the difference between metropolitan areas and non‐metropolitan areas we studied whether it affects the operation of makerspaces and how does this reflect on makerspaces’ policy or program development.

As a result, as shown in Table 3, 51% of metropolitan areas and metropolitan cities and 49% of non‐metropolitan areas (provinces) showed a similar response rate.

The items in the questionnaire used in this study were 3 items concerning the needs of makerspaces’ operation and 3 items dealt with makerspaces’ operation requirements for a total of 6. Details of each area are as follows.

Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS statistical program. Frequency analysis was conducted to determine the frequency of questions, and the differences between the groups were analyzed using the cross‐analysis (Chi‐Square analysis) to identify differences among the groups. As a result of the cross analysis performed, the analysis was divided into metropolitan areas and metropolitan city public libraries and non–metropolitan public libraries.

Regarding the introduction of makerspaces into the public library, 87% of public librarians answered that they needed it, and 13% said it was unnecessary. As to why the introduction was necessary, they said “diversification of the role of the library according to the changing times” was the highest at 37%, followed by “cultivation of creative talent” at 30%, and the makerspaces’ education as a lifelong educational institution’ at 21%.

On the other hand, the 13% of the respondents who said that the introduction of makerspaces was unnecessary said that the additional introduction of new work in an environment where the current work could not be faithfully performed will interfere with the current library work, followed by the impossibility of the introduction of the additional work with the current library space and manpower, and the lack of equipment and space.

As a result of analyzing measures to activate the makerspaces’ operation, 27.1% (103 people) of ‘securing makerspaces’ operation budget (including the support of the central government) was the highest, and 22.4% (85 people) of ‘securing operating specialists’, 21.6% (82 people) of ‘establishment of medium and long‐term policies to activate makerspaces and operation of pilot libraries’, 16.6% (63 people) for ‘training to strengthen the competency of the makerspaces’ operators,’ 10.8% (41 people) for ‘changes in the perception of the need for makerspaces in and outside of the library’, and 1.6% (6 people) of ‘others,’ respectively.

As a result of analyzing the effect that a makerspaces operation has on the local community, 37.5% (112 people) responded ‘contribution to cultivating creative talents and forming community’, ‘diversification of library functions beyond the book loan and return service’ (31.1% for 93 people), ‘activation of creative education centered on children and adolescents’ (23.1% for 69 people), ‘base facility as a window for expanding local community jobs and supporting employment’ (7.4% for 22 people), and others (1%), respectively.

The question of the effect of the makerspaces’ operation on the community can be seen to be very similar to the response for the need for makerspaces.

Other areas of multiple opinions were in the order of: a responsible ministries’ policy implementation plan (52%) > space development plan (19%) > a proposal of program contents (10%) = change of direction (10%) > a recognition change and promotion plan (6%).

Looking more closely into policy directions among the above details, we first had to observe changes in the roles and activities of public libraries which are changing according to the changes of the times, and as a result, they strongly agree with the need for makerspaces. Second, it is hoped to set up mid‐ to long‐term policies and prepare detailed plans to demonstrate detailed projects. Third, they are considering that gradual changes in the perception of the inside and outside of the library → infrastructure establishment → systematic professional education → mid‐ to long‐term policy should be established first. Fourth, they think that it is necessary to establish the space for makerspaces through the support of the national treasury, in order to purchase equipment, and to operate the program itself as well as to set up a life culture era early. Fifth, various activities should be carried out on a regional basis. Sixth, it is difficult to allocate a budget and to maintain its independence through autonomous operation, and it is necessary to share and utilize good programs even if space is not secured.

This research has investigated the need for introducing makerspaces in public libraries, the direction of makerspaces, support policies, and the perception of dissemination structures. Based on these efforts, we would like to identify issues and make recommendations accordingly.

The first subject of the discussion is the librarian’s perception of the need for creating makerspaces. In other words, public library librarians answered that 87% of them think that it is necessary to introduce and install makerspace in public libraries, because the need for diversification of the library’s role, through such areas as training of creative talents in the era of the 4th industrial revolution and meeting the need for library users and the surrounding area would be beneficial. 13% of the respondents who said they did not need it explained that they lacked space, equipment, carried concerns about workload, and lack of personnel. In conclusion, although they agreed in principle with introducing makerspaces in public libraries, it seems that it needs to be additionally done with space, equipment, manpower, and budget support to increase consensus and efficiency.

As the next subject of the discussion, the public library librarians refer to the most favorable operating direction of makerspaces as support for the discovery and educational operation of makerspaces’ programs and the creation of a dedicated space for makerspaces centered on the local library base. It is apparent that there is also considerable opinion in this connection.

Based on these, in this study, we would like to propose a direction for a public library’s makerspaces’ operation as follows. First, as a need for medium‐ and long‐term policy development, the government and budget support plan and manpower resource development plan for the purchase of equipment necessary for makerspaces’ creation and education should be established, and plans should be made so that there will be no differentiation according to area. Second, after 2013, they must participate in an infinite imagination room support program and receive consultation on policy development, manual development, program planning, etc. by forming an advisory committee composed of librarians, practitioners and related researchers who have experience in operating the space. Third, it is necessary to secure space as one of the most difficult problems since it is impossible for all libraries to secure space, and it is necessary to select a central representative library or a central library at the level of a municipal public library and focus on them. Fourth, it is necessary to develop manuals for public library makerspaces including contents of space standards, manpower standards, and interior models, and it should be accompanied by manual utilization education. Fifth, even if it is impossible to secure a space, related programs can be shared and utilized. Therefore, it is necessary for the central government to establish detailed business plans (program contents, lecturers) for business purposes and to select and operate lectures according to their own situation. Since it is impossible for all public libraries to carry out all the processes of all subjects, it is necessary for them to analyze the community and then set up appropriate subject areas and preserve space and equipment. In addition, it will be effective to operate the public library makerspaces by determining which level of makerspaces to operate. Sixth, it is necessary to secure human resources such as librarians and external experts and volunteers. In order to operate makerspaces, external experts are required to train the librarians. In order to harmonize with existing members, it is also necessary to conduct pre‐library education. Seventh, reading education should be executed so that a sharing culture, creative culture, and participation culture can be created. Furthermore, it is necessary to develop self–directed learning and experience through library utilization education. Eighth, the library should be responsible for an information service for maker production information sharing. One of the cultural programs will be the maker fair event. In addition, it is necessary to operate an information sharing database of maker culture and education programs.

The final subject of the discussion is what public library librarians think of as the expansion structure of makerspace. The fourth industrial revolution and innovation society are at the forefront of technological revolution. In response to these changes, the world is actively developing the maker movement to nurture a new innovation class. Therefore, it is necessary to change the library to play a leading role in a changing life style, and it is necessary to present a direction of policies in order to expand the library’s competency to utilize a cultural technology.

In this connection, this research proposes to divide the dissemination structure of the maker movement into aspects of infrastructure, culture, education, and commercialization. First, in terms of infrastructure, the creative space will serve as a centerpiece and foundation for the proliferation of maker campaigns, providing various facilities and spaces, various educational programs and commercialization support that are available to anyone with ideas. To spread the makerspace’s movement, the government could support policies such as space and budget for cultural facilities such as public libraries, art and science museums. The library, which plays the role of an infrastructure for the proliferation of makers’ movements, should provide production facilities and space, various educational programs, commercialization support, and promote publicity for the proliferation of a maker movement. Second, concerning a cultural aspect, this comes from a creative culture that enjoys making and sharing within the context of people’s interests, and spreads all to the public through online sites and communities for information sharing and maker fairs. One of the cultural programs will be the maker fair event. In addition, it is necessary to operate an information sharing database of maker culture and education programs. Third, as an educational aspect, it is necessary to provide opportunities for anyone to easily learn production skills and implement their own creative ideas as prototypes with various educational support for manufacturers. It is possible to provide production technology education through the educational functions of the library. In the US and Europe, maker education is rapidly spreading with STEAM education and S/W education. We will also need a personality education along with the reading program to develop the maker culture. In the field of personality education, reading education should be done so that a shared culture, a creative culture, and a participatory culture can be created. Furthermore, it is necessary to develop self–directed learning and experience through library utilization education. Fourth, in terms of commercialization, prototypes can be commercialized through an entrepreneurial support system. As a successful entrepreneurship case has emerged, social interest and policy support for the maker movement is expanding. Libraries can also contribute to sharing case information.

In this study, we propose some future research based on the above findings and discussions.

First, in order to introduce makerspaces suitable for Korea into the public library, research that establishes a mid-term to long‐term development plan should be performed. This research should include policies related to budget, manpower, organization, programs, and space as well as step‐by‐step strategies and operational directions.

Second, it is necessary to conduct a comparative study on the public perception of librarians and the users of public libraries operating the makerspace and public libraries that are not operating makerspaces. In fact, the needs and perceptions of users are more important than librarians in terms of operators. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct research on perception based on the deeper consumer demand.

NMC Horizon Report (2017) expects that maker space of university libraries will shape the major trend for the following three year. Therefore, this paper is of significance in context of analyzing the perception of maker space related public libraries as one of the roles played by such futuristic libraries.