“A Voice to Talk About it”: Cosmetologists as STEM Experts in Educational Technology Design and Implementation

Abstract

In the U.S. there are steady efforts by governmental and philanthropic organizations to increase the representation of students of colour in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). After years of mixed results, researchers and educators have started to question one size fits all notions of broadening participation. An increasing number of projects are challenging universalist assumptions by enrolling the expertise of culturally situated communities of practice in STEM lessons and the educational technologies that support them. While this research shows promising results for improving young people’s interest and performance in STEM, there has been little research on how these lessons and technologies might also benefit the communities whose expertise were originally enrolled. This paper details the design of educational technologies that bridge STEM and African American cosmetology. We report on a mixed-methods research project, conducted with a group of predominantly African American cosmetologists. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected to study their attitudes toward STEM before and after working with the technologies. Our results suggest positive changes in the cosmetologists’ attitudes. We end with a critical discussion about respecting the knowledge systems of underrepresented communities of practice in educational technology research and development.

Full text

1
“A VOICE TO TALK ABOUT IT”: COSMETOLOGISTS AS STEM
EXPERTS IN EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION
Michael Lachney (lachneym@msu.edu), William Babbitt (babbiw2@rpi.edu), Audrey Bennett
(agbennet@umich.edu), and Ron Eglash (eglash@umich.edu)
Abstract
In the U.S. there are steady efforts by governmental and philanthropic organizations to
increase the representation of underrepresented students entering science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM). After years of mixed results, researchers
and educators have started to question one size fits all notions of broadening
participation. An increasing number of projects are challenging universalist assumptions
by enrolling the expertise of culturally situated communities of practice in STEM lessons
and educational technology designs. While this research shows promising results for
improving young people’s interest and performance in STEM, there has been little
research on how these lessons and technologies might also benefit the communities whose
expertise were originally enrolled. This paper details the design of educational
technologies that bridge STEM and African American cosmetology. We report on a
mixed-method research project, conducted with a group of predominantly African
American cosmetologists. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected to study their
attitudes toward STEM before and after working with the technologies. Our results suggest
positive changes in the cosmetologist's perceptions of and confidence engaging with STEM.
We end with a critical discussion about respecting the knowledge systems of
underrepresented communities of practice in educational technology design and research.
Keywords: communities of practice, educational technology, culturally responsive
teaching, STEM education, computing
Introduction
Despite decades of investments from governmental agencies (e.g. National
Science Foundation) and philanthropic organizations (e.g., The Gates Foundation) to
broaden the participation of people of color pursuing science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) education and entering the workforce, underrepresentation
continues to be a persistent issue in the United States (NSB 2018). Generally,
more underrepresented students are pursuing STEM education than in the past, but
graduation does not consistently improve (Marx 2017). Malcom and Malcom-Piqeux
(2013) report that when it comes to bachelor's degrees in mathematics and statistics,
for example, African Americans have dipped from 7.1% of recipients in 2001 to 5% in
2010 (p. 177). Workforce trends are similarly troubling. According to the National Science
Board (2018), while Black citizens made up 11.8% of the U.S. population in 2015, they
made up only 4.8% of those in science and engineering occupations that same year (p.
114).
A major problem that has been identified as a source of persistent underrepresentation is the
uneven distribution of relevant expertise and resources, and therefore student
experiences, between schools that serve Black, Latinx, or Indigenous communities and
those that serve White communities. For example, Margolis et al. (2008) use the
metaphor of “shallow” to describe students’ experiences in schools where technologies
for computing education are available, but without a rigorous (i.e. deep) curriculum that
can be implemented by adults with relevant expertise. Indeed, the shallow implementation
of educational technologies often means that they are treated as rewards, reproduce the
authority of the teacher, or, as Cuban
Lachney, M., Babbitt, W., Bennett, A., & Eglash, R. (2019). " A Voice to Talk About it": Cosmetologists as
STEM Experts in Educational Technology Design and Implementation. European Journal of Open, Distance
and E-learning, 22(2).

2
(2001) puts it, are “oversold and under used.” But what does “deep STEM engagement”
mean in the context of Black, Latinx and Indigenous communities? Strategies for enriching
and deepening the experiences of underrepresented students cannot simply be additional
technology or rigor; nor the surface gloss of adding brown virtual characters and ethnic
names to the same old lessons. Acknowledging that access to technology is not enough for
overcoming racial inequity and providing deep engagement with STEM content, there have
been some efforts to enroll “communities of practice” (CoP) (Lave and Wenger 1991) that are
relevant to the lived experiences of students of color in technology design and
implementation. Some initiatives seek to collaborate with CoP to attract students to existing
STEM programs such as the FIRST LEGO League (Rosen et al. 2013), while others draw on
the expertise of CoP as a central part of design and implementation itself, as in culturally
responsive computer programming environments (Eglash et al. 2017).
Generally, CoP are understood as sites of knowledge where learning, and not necessarily
teaching, is a central phenomenon; often in apprenticeship relationships between experts
and novices in fields such as carpentry, midwifery, cosmetology, and at one point in history
even engineering, among many others. Lave and Wenger (1991) explain that “A community
of practice is a set of relations among persons, activity, and world, over time and in relation
with other tangential and overlapping communities of practice” (p. 98). The identity of CoP is
often constituted by commitments and interests to a shared domain of practice, which are
understood through shared tools, narratives, and problem-solving techniques. The
community is then made up of relationships connected by these domains and practices.
Even though the CoP concept has wide reach in the field of educational technology,
researchers often under theorize it and uncritically assume a harmonious relationship to
education, without attention to power relationships and the heterogeneity of group
membership and identity. As Henderson (2015) explains in a critique of CoP in educational
technology scholarship, “...there is a substantial body of literature and a corresponding
tradition of research that ignores or treats as peripheral the complex relationships between
technology, individuals, the collective, and a given sociocultural context over time” (p. 127).
Therefore, it is important when using the concept in educational technology research to give
voice to not only how CoP might successfully support STEM education but also the tensions
and differences between CoP (in particular STEM professionals and community groups) that
arise during design and implementation.
This paper seeks to better understand the complex “looping” relationship between CoP and
the development of educational technologies, using a case study in which adult professionals
in African American hair care; professionals in computational modelling; and STEM
education communities were brought together in efforts that aimed to broaden the
participation of African Americans in STEM fields. Here, “looping” is in reference to Hacking’s
(1999) concept of the looping effect, which is meant to denote the fact that people change
based on what they believe about themselves and how they (and their knowledge) are
classified or treated. In our case the loops run in both directions, as the educational
technology design is adjusted in response to user outcomes, a process referred to as
“recursive emergence” (Lachney et al. 2016). In this essay we are specifically interested in
answering the question: how do CoP’s perceptions of STEM change after being exposed to
educational technologies that highlight the role of STEM in their professional practices? To
provide a partial answer to this question we detail collaborative efforts to design and use
educational technologies that highlight the STEM knowledge that cosmetologists use in their
salons, and teachers use in their classrooms. Challenging unidirectional flows of knowledge
that typically frame expertise in service of youth education, we explore possibilities for how
educational technologies might also support positive perceptions of STEM by localized CoP.
We begin by explaining collaborative efforts between researchers, high school students, and
natural hair care experts around two culturally responsive, cosmetology-focused educational
technologies: Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered. These efforts resulted in a professional

3
development workshop for cosmetologists during the spring of 2018. Next, we detail the
qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods used to study
cosmetologists’ perceptions of STEM before and after working with these two technologies.
Our findings show increases in cosmetologists’ comfort with technology and appreciation for
STEM education while revealing reservations that some workshop participants had with the
use of their knowledge by university researchers. We end with a discussion about the role of
educational technologies in not only supporting youth academics and attitudes but also
providing a platform for dialogue within and between CoP.
Background
During the summer of 2017 a team of social scientists and technologists at a university in
Upstate New York hired three young women, two were African American and one multiracial
(ages 14-16) as high school interns to help explore intersections between cosmetology and
STEM. They were to identify intersections that could motivate educational technology design.
Two of the young women had participated in an after-school program with the same topic the
previous school year, and the other had learned about the internship opportunity from her
hairstylist. None of them were interested in becoming professional cosmetologists, but they
all had familiarity with or had family members in the profession, volunteering for the summer
program with a clear understanding of goals and expectations. To give them a sense of what
an intersection between STEM and cosmetology might look like, during the first part of the
internship they were exposed to a culturally responsive computing application called Cornrow
Curves.
Cornrow Curves is one of a large number of similar online learning modules in the suite of
Culturally Situated Design Tools (CSDTs). CSDTs highlight connections between computing
and culture by helping young people explore how computational and mathematical thinking
are already present in the practices and artifacts of CoP (Eglash et al 2006). They are
grounded in theories of culturally responsive teaching (CRT) and situated within empirical
studies on culturally responsive computing (CRC). As part of these larger research
programmes, CSDTs help to acknowledge the value-laden and political nature of education
(Freire 1970; Illich 1971) by building on CRT’s challenge to deficit thinking. Yosso (2017)
explains that deficit thinking assumes “...that schools work and that students, parents, and
communities need to change to conform to this already effective and equitable system” (p.
119). Emdin (2016) argues that this type of thinking can have severe consequences for how
young people view school: “The denial of my reality in academic spaces signals more than
individual denials of others’ histories; it is a systematic denial within institutions built upon
white cultural traditions that oppress and silence” youths of color (p. 12).
CSDTs seek to challenge deficit thinking by placing culture--“a dynamic system of social
values, cognitive codes, behavioral standards, worldviews, and beliefs used to give order
and meaning to our lives as well as the lives of others” (Gay 2018, p. 6)--and the cultural
practices of CoP at the center of educational technology design and implementation. A
defining feature of CoP is how knowledge that is associated with cultural practices and
learned through participation in cultural activities is spatially and temporally situated. As Lave
and Wenger (1991) explain, “A community of practice is an intrinsic condition for the
existence of knowledge, not least because it provides the interpretive support necessary for
making sense of its heritage” (p. 98). CSDTs frame CoP’s knowledge and associated
heritage that young people are part of or familiar with as assets to support, not hinder, the
educational process and their socio-emotional development. Alim and Paris (2017) caution
against a strictly asset-oriented view of culture that risks commodifying it for state-sanctioned
ends, arguing for the need to sustain and respect cultural dynamics in and of themselves
beyond their use-value to schools. CSDTs further these goals by designing socio-technical
environments where computing power works in service of CoP in ways that reflect culturally
situated identities, traditions, and assets (Scott et al. 2015; Lachney 2016).

4
As an example, Cornrow Curves (see figure 1) is a visual programming environment created
in collaboration with experts in African and African American hair braiding. Collaborating with
these experts over the course of years, during the many iterations of the software, entails
what Bennett (2016) calls “ethnocomputational” design. This involves a “translation” process
between the language and conceptualization of the braiding process by cosmetologists and
the language and conceptualization of an algorithm by computer scientists. The result of the
translation is called a “heritage algorithm,” which Bennett (2016) describes as “the under-
utilized computational potential in cultural arts such as African-American cornrows, Native
American beadwork, and urban graffiti” (p. 593). Similar to the interface of other visual
programming environments, users encounter the heritage algorithm of cornrow braiding as
an assemblage of blocks (i.e., black boxed rules and functions) that can be dragged,
dropped, and snapped together in a scripting panel and run to produce a visual output (i.e.,
graphic designs with cornrow braids). The heritage algorithm for cornrow braiding that users
reverse engineer is similar to many other African and African American traditional cultural
designs that are embedded with scaling geometric patterns that might be described using the
language of transformational geometry: dilation, reflection, rotation, and translation (Eglash
1999).
Figure 1. Student created design in Cornrow Curves.
After the three interns explored Cornrow Curves and each made a design of their own, they
conducted research and brainstormed other possible intersections between STEM and
cosmetology. We were particularly interested to see if they would find additional intersections
to motivate the use of computational technologies that would benefit both STEM classrooms
and hair salons. During a presentation to a group of researchers and technologists about
their findings, they identified pH as an important part of the cosmetology chemistry curricula
that impacts decisions on what treatments cosmetologists recommend to their clients.
Indeed, when applying products to their clients’ hair, cosmetologists must know the pH of
different products and balance them to maintain healthy levels (naturally the pH of hair and
skin is between 4.5-5.5). After the presentation, they consulted with an undergraduate in
computer science and agreed to spend time learning to build, calibrate, and use a DIY pH
sensor, connected to an Arduino microcontroller (see figure 2). We would later create a small
website around this sensor building activity and call it pH Empowered, bringing together
content that includes the politics of Black hair, chemistry, and computing.

5
Figure 2. The built pH sensor using materials for Arduino and Scientific Atlas.
Later in the month, after the interns were familiar with the technology, we invited two African
American women--a high school cosmetology teacher, and the mother of one of the young
women, who is a cosmetologist--to help prepare for a public Afrocentric cultural event in a
nearby city. Our goal was to demo Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered at the event,
showcasing both the work of the interns, in addition to highlighting connections between
African American cultural capital and STEM. The teacher was enthusiastic about pH
Empowered but offered the critique that the representation of data in the Arduino software
did not reflect how students in her class would be exposed to pH, which was with a traditional
color-coded and numbered pH scale from 0 (most acidic) to 14 (most alkaline). What is more,
she explained that students in her classes have the most difficulty with connecting the
increases and decreases in the density of hydrogen and hydroxide ions at different points
along the pH scale. In response, the interns and teacher worked with a computer science
undergraduate to develop a pH visualizer (see figure 3) that would represent the output of
data from the pH sensor along the pH color-coded and numbered scale. Above the scale is a
visual indicator for the density of ions, with red dots representing hydrogen ions (more acidic)
and blue dots representing hydroxide ions (more alkaline).

6
Figure 3. Two students using the pH Empowered visualizer as part of the cosmetology teacher’s
lesson on pH later that year
During these preparation sessions, we had the opportunity to learn more about the CoP
around cosmetology in the area by getting to know the cosmetology teacher and the young
woman's mother, who chose the pseudonym of “Nicole” for this paper. We discovered that
the interns’ focus on pH had been partially inspired by Nicole’s knowledge of chemistry and
passion for “natural” hair care: “Hair that is not chemically altered or strengthened by the
pressing comb or blow dryer” (Banks 2000, p. 172). We discovered that Nicole is not only a
well-known cosmetologist who makes her own natural cosmetic products, but is also a
proponent of the natural hair care movement, which seeks to “encourage people to
appreciate their own hair texture and the possibilities it offers” (Tarlo 2016, p. 134). Based on
her formal and informal education, Nicole uses her knowledge of human anatomy and
physiology to educate clients about both natural and chemical hair care, often drawing on
such STEM literacies to build trust and rapport with her clients.
While collaborating to prepare for the Afrocentric cultural event, Nicole expressed interest in
using her own STEM literacies to help enroll other cosmetologists in culturally responsive
educational technology research and development. As a result, a professional development
workshop that aimed to introduce Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered to local
cosmetologists for the purposes of listening to their feedback and preparing them to
collaborate with teachers was arranged for early 2018. Nicole worked alongside researchers
and technologists in workshop planning, recruitment, and facilitation. The workshop was
used as an opportunity to conduct an in-depth study of Nicole’s own STEM identity and
workshop participants’ perceptions of STEM as it relates to their professional practice. In
other words, it was used to help answer the question: how do cosmetologists perceptions of
STEM change after being exposed to educational technologies that highlight the role of
STEM in their professional practices?

7
Methods and Participants
The planning of the cosmetology professional development workshop took place between
November 2017 - January 2018, with Nicole and researchers meeting in person, talking over
the phone, and exchanging emails. A six-hour workshop was scheduled for a Monday during
January 2018 to take place at a STEM-focused university in Upstate New York. According to
Nicole, many cosmetologists where she lives take Mondays off after working part of the
weekend. For this reason, we decided that it would be the best day of the week to try and
recruit participants. Nicole took on the recruitment responsibilities, advertising primarily
through word of mouth and showing up at salons to pass out flyers. The workshop was
designed to introduce participants to both Cornrow Curves and pH empowered, bookended
with discussion and reflection periods about the relationships between STEM and
cosmetology.
While the workshop was a primary source of data collection, we treated the whole
preparation and recruitment process for the workshop as a research opportunity to learn
more about Nicole’s relationship to cosmetological CoP and STEM knowledge more
generally. Nicole participated in semi-structured pre- and post-workshop interviews, which
were transcribed for analysis. In addition, field notes and audio recordings were taken during
preparatory meetings. These data were analysed using a “descriptive” coding technique in
which excerpts were summarized with a single word or short phrase to denote the central
topic of the text (Saldaña 2016, p. 292). These codes were then organized into three
predetermined categories (science and cosmetology; technology and cosmetology;
community and cosmetology) to understand Nicole’s process of preparing and running the
workshop, and better make sense of her perceptions of STEM.
A pre-post survey made up of six sections was created in collaboration with two external
evaluators to collect data on workshop participants. The first section provided a space to
“please tell us about yourself” by providing information on gender and ethnicity. The next
three sections included ten close-ended statements designed to be answered using a six-
point Likert-type scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Slightly Disagree, 4=Slightly
Agree, 5=Agree, 6=Strongly Agree. Of these, the first five items were intended to measure
participants’ perceptions about the relationship between cosmetology and science. The next
item intended to measure their perceptions of cosmetology as a source of community
empowerment. And the last four items were for participants’ perceptions of the relationship
between computing technology and cosmetology. The fifth and sixth sections were made up
of five open-ended questions about the relationship between cosmetology, STEM disciplines,
and community improvement. In addition to the pre-post survey, field notes and audio
recordings were taken during the workshop, which, along with the open-ended survey
questions, were also analysed using descriptive coding and fitted within the three pre-
established categories mentioned above.
Altogether nine participants attended the workshop, with most identifying as Black/African
American and female (see table 1). Of the nine attendees, we were able to match pre-post
surveys to eight. While ten cosmetologists (i.e. nine workshop attendees and Nicole as the
workshop facilitator) is not a large enough “n” to claim statistical significance of any kind,
there have been calls in equity-oriented STEM education research to embrace studies with
small numbers of individuals. According to Slaton and Pawley (2015), overcoming the stigma
of “small n” studies is an important step to recognizing differences among individuals and
destabilizing established assumptions and even stereotypes about identity categories (e.g.,
racial and gender categories). They argue that dismissing small-n research that focuses on
already underrepresented identities in STEM risks further marginalization of those identities
by losing out on not only nuanced differences between people but whole lived experiences.

8
Table 1: Demographic information of professional cosmetology professional development workshop
attendees.
Gender
N
Percent
Ethnicity
N
Percent
Female
7
77.8
Black/African
American
8
88.9
Male
2
22.2
White
1
11.1
Building on the affordances for small-n research to speak to differences in perceptions and
experiences within and between groups, such methodological decisions have an important
role to play in strengthening educational technology research on CoP. As Henderson (2015)
argues, educational technology research needs to be more critical and unromantic about
perceived relationships of harmony between specific sociocultural activities and CoP. Small-
n research can aid in these goals by exploring cases where sociocultural activities (e.g.,
braiding or producing natural cosmetic products) are conceptualized in divergent ways for
various means and ends. For example, desires to situate cornrow braiding in multicultural
versus culture-specific curriculum. To explore such nuances within the cosmetology CoP that
were represented in the workshop, we triangulated survey, interview, and field note data to
give a robust analysis of the different ways that STEM and cosmetology were seen as
related, and how this relationship was framed by the two technologies.
Findings
In order to answer our research question, we triangulated data by organizing it into three
predetermined categories: science and cosmetology, technology and cosmetology, and
cosmetology and community. In addition, one post hoc category emerged: skepticism.
Skepticism appeared in some cosmetologists’ precautionary inquiries and reservations about
the use of their knowledge by university researchers, and was reinforced as a result of the
workshop being a social networking opportunity for people with similar interests and
backgrounds who don’t always have the opportunity to meet up and discuss cosmetology.
Before getting into the specifics, it is important to note that generally, the cosmetologists’
perceptions of STEM were positive before and after the workshop. While positive changes
were seen in each of the close-ended questions on the post-survey, their pre-survey answers
indicate an overall positive view of STEM and its relationship to cosmetology. This is
supported by pre-post survey answers to one of the open-ended questions: “please describe
how you imagine cosmetology can contribute to improving science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) education.” Every answer to this question indicated that
cosmetology has clear connections to STEM--with the most obvious relevance to the
disciplines of chemistry and anatomy--and many indicated the unique potential of
cosmetology to support science teaching and learning.
The following pre-survey response brings the pedagogical contributions and inherent
relevance of cosmetology and STEM together: “By proving our knowledge of the makeup of
hair and the products we use, one can better understand the relationship between
cos[metology] and science. Why we use the things we use, how it affects you, your skin and
how it is composed.” Similar responses were found in the post-surveys. One slight difference
was that more answers mentioned the use of technology to support both education and the
salon. For example, “We could contribute to it by testing products out, as well as testing out
technology with what we do.” As we will see below, the increased attention to technology in
post-survey answers is consistent with increases in cosmetologists comfort with technology
and perception that their knowledge of technology is relevant to their customers.

9
Science and Cosmetology
The fact that cosmetologists so readily found pedagogic and scientific relevance in their
profession when asked about STEM is supported by both their open and closed-ended
answers that asked about science specifically. Table 2 shows that of the eight matched pre-
post surveys, the majority of participants had established beliefs about the relevance of
science to their profession and its potential to support science education. When asked to
“describe what you perceive as the relationship between cosmetology and science,” the
majority of pre-survey answers drew on the anatomy and/or chemistry terminology to support
the connection. For example,
The composition of the hair and scalp, its breakdown. How things like chemicals and
certain conditioners affect your hair and scalp. The inner workings of the
body are directly correlated with the hair and scalp.
This is consistent with Nicole’s pre-workshop interview, where she describes how using
scientific knowledge is not only important for differentiating products and treatments, but also
for educating and building rapport with clients:
Because it’s just so important to kind of educate your client also on the science,
because it is a science… hair is made out of certain proteins and bonds…
they all work together and in a way which a lot of people... don’t understand
and don’t educate themselves, don’t realize. And, for me, it’s just amazing.
Given the way that scientific literacies support both the knowledge base of cosmetology and
customer relationships, it is not surprising that the connections between cosmetology and
science are not a stretch for many professionals.
Table 2: Pre-post survey answer comparison for science and cosmetology items.
Statement
Pre %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
Post %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
%
Change
I think that cosmetology and science can mutually
support each other.
87.5
100
+12.5
I feel confident talking about science to my
customers.
75
87.5
+12.5
I think that young people in my community would
benefit from having more cosmetology in their
science courses.
75
100
+25
I think that understanding chemistry improves the
practices of cosmetologists
75
100
+25
I would feel confident collaborating with a science
teacher to help deliver a chemistry lesson in the
classroom
62.5
75
+12.5
The post-survey answers in Table 2 about their confidence in collaborating with teachers and
talking about science to customers may be connected to some of the language and ideas
communicated during the workshop. While their post-survey open-ended answers tended to
be shorter, they all used specific terminology as related to pH: “pH balance and working with
products that affect the hair.” It is possible that building the probe, testing products, and
discussing their results in collaboration with one another reinforced existing knowledge in
new ways for these cosmetologists.
While the cosmetologists found explicit pedagogic and scientific value in their profession,
there was a general sense that scientific experts and scientific judgments were outside of
their own communities. When the cosmetologists were asked “Describe some strategies for

10
distinguishing between real and fake scientific studies,” many answers on both pre- and post-
surveys referenced the Food and Drug Administration as the arbiter of such judgements (e.g.
“If the FDA approves” and “by looking up FDA reports”), not their own abilities to perform
experiments or collect data. Nicole also positions science outside of her community while
discussing her perceptions of Cornrow Curves at previous workshops for youth:
...living in like an urban community, you don’t really get a lot of science, technology
and things like -- it’s just not always there unless someone brings it into the
community and things of that nature. So it’s really good to have that
exposure.
Nicole’s comments remind us about the persistent underrepresentation of people of color in
STEM fields and the fact that the value of science and technology is often directed toward
military and corporate ends, not local communities (Eglash et al. 2017). But this should not
overshadow the fact that the processes and products of science are being employed by
Nicole and other cosmetologists in very intentional and creative ways. In other words,
cosmetologists might not be popularly identified as scientists, but the fact that they clearly
have scientific expertise might help call this demarcation between expertise and expert into
question.
Technology and Cosmetology
Participants perceptions of the relationship between technology and cosmetology were
generally positive for answers to the close-ended pre-survey items, with increases in the
post. Table 3 suggests that most workshop participants had existing positive attitudes toward
the role of computer science in supporting cosmetology. In addition, most indicated
confidence in delivering a computing lesson with technology teachers.
When asked to “Describe what you perceive as the relationship between cosmetology and
computing,” they gave a variety of answers for both the pre- and post-surveys that ranged
from data storage to mathematically informed artistic rendering and computational sensing.
What changed seemed to be less focus on the computer for storage and more on the artistic
potential and precision of computing:
I perceive it as measurements & placements. This could help with knowing where to
place color, highlight, braids, dreads. Also knowing about sizing.
Given Cornrow Curves emphasis on coding visual designs, the workshop activities may have
supported the idea that computing can be a creative medium.
Table 3: Pre-post survey answer comparison for technology and cosmetology items.
Statement
Pre %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
Post %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
%
Change
I think that computer science can make an
important contribution to cosmetology
87.5
100
+12.5
I feel confident using computing technology in my
cosmetology practice
62.5
87.5
+25
I feel that my customers would benefit from my
knowledge of technology and computing
50
100
+50
I feel confident in collaborating with a technology
teacher to help deliver a computing lesson in the
classroom
75
87.5
+12.5
Nicole reinforced the idea that cosmetology is a good contact zone between STEM and art in
a post-workshop interview,

11
...a lot of cosmetologists look at what they do as an art, and that’s what it is. They
create on someone’s head, but still, as a creator, these are still human
beings, and they want to have healthy hair, and sometimes you need to step
back away from the art part and understand the science behind what it is that
you are doing…
The important role of creativity in computing is supported by many computer science
education researchers (Papert 1980; Solomon 1988; Bennett 2016; Resnick 2017), but there
has been little research on how creativity might help adults make contact with computer
science education inside and outside of formal education environments. And, how might
these adult’s knowledge of computing support deeper engagement with educational
technology for youth?
The most notable changes in Table 3 are with the cosmetologist's answers to questions
about their own professional practices and customer relationships. Not only did they indicate
more confidence in using technology to support their practice, but to a greater extent that
their customers would benefit from their knowledge of computing. Cornrow Curves or pH
Empowered might have helped address their already existing knowledge. As with the
cosmetology teacher’s prompt to connect the pH sensor to a pH visualizer for helping her
students understand ions, part of the creativity in computing is helping people explore
existing interests and concerns--professional or otherwise--in new ways.
While the workshop participants had a generally positive attitude toward technology’s
relationship to cosmetology, they also provided important critiques and constructive criticism
about Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered during the workshop. For example, when asked
the question we posed to the high school interns the summer before (i.e. how might these
technologies support both schools and salons?) workshop participants generally thought it
was fine for schools, but feedback for how the technology could support the salon came in
the form of new directions and changes to existing technology. One workshop participant
who made a multi-color Cornrow Curves design explained that he thought the program’s
color blocks would be useful for “mapping” out hair color patterns before applying them to
customers. At the same time, he stressed the need for representing different head sizes and
dimensions as part of the software for it to be most useful.
Nicole also provided important critiques of previous Cornrow Curves projects. For one
program, we explored the role that 3D printed Cornrow Curves designs might play in showing
off potential styles for customers. While sitting in her salon with the 3D prints displayed
during the pre-workshop interview, Nicole explained the limitations of the project:
Because like this isn’t exact… scalp and there is no hair growing out of it and then
like everyone's hairline is different… it looks nice… but doesn’t show exactly
like - like say for instance a picture…
This was not to suggest that the 3D prints should be excluded from the salon space, but that
their use could not necessarily be fully predetermined. Nicole also explained how the 3D
printed heads inspired STEM-oriented conversations with her customers that were not
already taking place in the salon. In addition to chemistry, anatomy, and physiology, the 3D
prints prompted discussions that included the topics of African mathematics and computing
algorithms.
Community and Cosmetology
Participants perceptions concerning their relationship with the larger community around them
were uniformly positive. As shown in table 4, the participants all agreed or strongly agreed
with the sentiment “I think cosmetology is a source of community empowerment,” with no
change on the post-survey for this closed-ended question. When asked about their
relationship with the larger community in open-ended questions, these professionals viewed

12
cosmetology as being a source of high self-esteem and confidence. This “empowerment,” in
their words, comes from their beliefs that “hair in the black community is a very important
aspect in personal happiness,” and that cosmetology brings “wellness to your body.” As one
workshop participant explained,
Yes, when someone comes to get their hair done, it is like an emotional fix. Looking
good makes people feel good about yourself, you make better decisions. It
contributes to morale.
Workshop participants saw themselves as part of a giving or helping profession: “We are a
community that is constantly giving back in numerous ways, whether it be a hairstyle or
donation.”
In addition, some of the post-test answers hint at the position of the barbershop or salon as a
community centre for forming interpersonal relationships and networks. For example,
The salon and barbershop is a staple in the community. People who wouldn’t
normally interact in everyday life will interact in these settings. It gives us a
forum and platform to use to voice new things we have learned to our
community.
Indeed, Majors (2015) explains how conversations that happen in hair salons play important
roles in exploring problem-solving strategies, developing linguistic literacies, and negotiating
cultural norms for many African Americans. The participants in the workshop appeared self-
aware of this fact.
Table 4: Pre-post survey answer comparison for community and cosmetology items.
Statement
Pre %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
Post %
Agree
+
Strongly Agree
%
Change
I think cosmetology is a source of community
empowerment
100
100
-
In addition to a general sentiment that cosmetology is a source of community empowerment
for education, self, and community, Nicole and workshop participants also indicated that they
appreciated the opportunity to connect with fellow cosmetologists at the workshop. One
workshop participant explained his desire to continue future workshops with existing and new
participants,
I think the next group is going to be just like we were, so passionate to finally get a
voice to talk about it… This is something we are all gonna talk about in the
salon.
Nicole also described a positive experience while she was recruiting for the workshop,
visiting four different salons in the process: “like that was just such a nice day for me.” In
addition to being able to see different salon spaces, she reconnected to students she had
taught in the past and other colleagues in the industry. Some of these connections were
maintained after the workshop ended. In a post-interview, Nicole explained,
...one of the guys, he called me yesterday to ask me a question about something...
he was like we have a natural hair stylist in our salon… is it okay if I
give her your number because she’s young and she’s new to this, but she
would have really benefited from learning from you.

13
For these and other reasons, Nicole and the rest of the team felt that the workshop was
successful in making these points of contact. At the same time that the workshop appeared
successful, there were moments of skepticism by some of the workshop participants about
the use of Black cosmetology knowledge for educational technology research.
Skepticism
In a post-workshop interview, Nicole reflected on some of the cultural and social dynamics of
cosmetology that intersect with the research project,
Like because a lot of people don’t understand about our hair or it’s always
like questions… “how did you get your hair to look like this”… sometimes
it’s just like, really? Like seriously? Like it becomes overwhelming for a
woman to keep having to explain what it is that they have done to their hair.
Not only do Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered risk increased scrutinization of Black
women’s hair by positioning it within contact of formal STEM education, but also risks
homogenizing the diversity of knowledges, styles, and preferences in the Black community,
giving the false impression of one form of authenticity (Mercer 1987). This topic was brought
up during a discussion period early on in the workshop and in one-on-one conversations with
White workshop facilitators. Cosmetologists explained to some members of the research
team about their experiences working in salons that specialized in serving different clienteles,
including those that were primarily Black, White, and/or multicultural. They urged the
research team to consider whom the research was meant to serve and reminded them of the
diversity of voices and bodies in Black cosmetology CoP.
Conclusion
How did the cosmetologists’ perceptions of STEM change after being exposed to educational
technologies that highlight the role of STEM in their professional practices? It appears that
STEM is an existing part of cosmetologists professional lives. Cornrow Curves and pH
Empowered emphasize these parts (e.g., artistic design and product treatments) while
providing points of contact to new STEM areas (e.g., computing and environmental sensors).
Being receptive to cosmetologists feedback and ideas helped to broaden our understanding
of stakeholders in culturally responsive educational technology design and implementation.
Indeed, listening to and representing the diversity of unified and divergent voices within
communities of practitioners (e.g., cosmetologists) is one step toward deepening theorization
with CoP in educational technology research and scholarship. Nicole, the workshop
participants, and other cosmetologists have generally approved of Cornrow Curves and pH
Empowered. But what if this was not the case? What if there were aspects of their
knowledge (e.g. those related to cultural or product specific knowledge that helps them build
rapport with clients) that they were uncomfortable with educational technology researchers
using? The obvious answers are that the researchers should respect their collaborators’
wishes and make conscious efforts not to represent that community knowledge within their
work, checking in with collaborators along the way to make sure such standards of “refusal”
(Simpson 2014; Tuck and Yang 2013; Patel 2015) are met.
As educational technologies become culturally situated and relevant, drawing on the
knowledge of localized CoP in efforts to deepen the STEM experiences for underrepresented
students, we believe there is a need for researchers and technologists to understand the
politics of refusal and create opportunities for refusal during design and implementation
processes. Patel (2015) has pointed out that one major problem with social science and
education research on and with marginalized communities is the tendency to treat knowledge
gathered in the form of data as property. Patel (2015) explains how “communities and
individuals, required for social science research as participants, don’t have existing systems

14
of redress if they wish to maintain ownership of their knowledges” (370). Building on the work
of Simpson (2014) and Tuck and Yang (2013), Patel suggests more frequent “refusal”
options and mechanisms as one way to confront the embedded ideologies of colonial
ownership in social science and educational research. While it would be wrong to assume
that there is one framework for refusal--“...all refusal is particular, meaning refusal is always
grounded in historical analysis and present conditions” (Tuck and Yang 2013, p. 243)—the
burden of providing opportunities for refusal in educational technology design should be on
the researchers. Refusal opportunities might begin with anonymous options for refusal
provided via surveys. Or, group discussions might be prompted by introducing the notion of
refusal and its importance in context of research with Black and Indigenous peoples and their
knowledges.
The practice and process of refusal by CoP should not be seen as a loss for educational
technology research and development, but instead an ethical “generative” opportunity to
build trust and rapport with participants in the strengthening of community assets (Eglash et
al. 2017). Indeed, researchers are often representatives for academic knowledge and
demarcated disciplines. The result of ignoring refusal is the loss of trust in researchers and,
possibly, the development of negative attitudes toward academic disciplines by participants.
The last thing the Cornrow Curves and pH Empowered teams would desire is for the existing
positive attitudes that our cosmetologist-collaborators have toward science and technology to
change because refusal was not taken seriously or ignored. If we aim to deepen theorization
of CoP in educational technology research, it may be that new forms of community-oriented
validity, based on granting and refusing the use of knowledge, will need to be developed.
References
1. Banks, I. (2000). Hair matters: Beauty, power, and black women’s consciousness. New
York, NY: NYU Press.
2. Bennett, A. (2016). Ethnocompuational creativity in STEAM education: A cultural
framework for generative justice. Teknokultura, 13(2), 587-612.
3. Bennett, A., Eglash, R., Lachney, M., & Babbitt, W. (2016). Design agency: Diversifying
computer science at the intersections of creativity and culture. In Revolutionizing
Education through Web-Based Instruction (pp. 35–56). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
4. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2016). Intentional Learning as a Goal of Instruction. In L.
B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser.
New York, NY: Routledge.
5. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Reforming schools through technology, 1980-
2000. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Eglash, R., Bennett, A., O Donnell, C., Jennings, S., & Cintorino, M. (2006). Culturally
situated design tools: Ethnocomputing from field site to classroom. American
Anthropologist, 108, 347. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2006.108.2.347
7. Eglash, R. (1999). African fractals: Modern computing and indigenous design. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
8. Eglash, R., Babbitt, W., Bennett, A., Bennett, K., Callahan, B., Davis, J., . . . Tully, K.
(2017). Culturally Situated Design Tools: Generative justice as a foundation for STEM
diversity. In P. Tripathi, Y. Rankin, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Moving Students of Color from
Consumers to Producers of Technology (pp. 132–151). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2005-4.ch007
9. Emdin, C. (2016). For White folks who teach in the Hood… and the rest of y'all too:
Reality pedagogy and urban education. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

15
10. Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
11. Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (Third
edition). Multicultural education series. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
12. Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
13. Henderson, M. (2015). The (mis) use of community of practice: Delusion, confusion, and
instrumentalism in educational technology research. In S. Bulfin, N. F. Johnson, & C.
Bigum (Eds.), Critical perspectives on technology and education (pp. 127–140). New
York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
14. Illich, I. (1970). Deschooling Society. New York, NY: Marion Boyars.
15. Lachney, M., Bennett, A., Appiah, J., & Eglash, R. (2016). Modeling in Ethnocomputing:
Replacing Bi-Directional Flows with Recursive Emergence. International Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 6(1), 219–243.
16. Lachney, M. (2017) Culturally responsive computing as brokerage: Toward asset building
with education-based social movements. Learning, Media and Technology. 42(4), 420-
439.
17. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation (Vol.
521423740). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Majors, T. J. (2015). Shoptalk: Lessons in teaching from an African American hair salon.
New York, NY: Teacher College Press.
19. Malcom, S. M., & Malcom-Piqueux, L. E. (2013). Critical mass revisited: Learning lessons
from research on diversity in STEM fields. Educational Researcher, 42(3), 176–178.
20. Margolis, J., Holme, J., Estrella, R., Goode, J., Nao, K., & Stumme, S. (2008). Stuck in
the shallow end: Race, education, and computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Marx, S. (2016). Qualitative Research in STEM: Studies of Equity, Access, and
Innovation. New York, NY: Routledge.
22. Mercer, K. (1987). Black hair/style politics. In Owusu, K. (Ed). Black British culture &
society: A text reader (111-121). New York, NY: Routledge.
23. National Science Board. (2018). Science & Engineering Indicators 2018. Arlington, VA:
National Science Foundation. Retrieved November 26, 2018 from:
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/
24. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York, NY:
Basic Books.
25. Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning
for justice in a changing world. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
26. Tuck, E., and Yang, K. W. (2014). R-Words: Refusing Research. In Paris, D., & Winn, M.
T. (Eds.). Humanizing Research: Decolonizing Qualitative Inquiry with Youth and
Communities (pp. 223-247). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
27. Patel, L. (2014). Countering coloniality in educational research: From ownership to
answerability. Educational Studies, 50(4), 357–377.
28. Pawley, A. L., & Slaton, A. E. (2015). The Power and Politics of STEM Research Design:
Saving the ‘Small N’. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference.
29. Resnick, M. Lifelong kindergarten: Cultivating creativity through projects, passion, peers,
and play. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

16
30. Rosen, J. H., Newsome, A., & Usselman, M. (2011). Promoting Diversity and Public
School Success in First Lego League State Competitions. In American Society for
Engineering Education.
31. Saldaña, J. (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, Third Edition. Los
Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
32. Scott, K. A., Sheridan, K. M., & Clark, K. (2015). Culturally responsive computing: A
theory revisited. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(4), 412–436.
33. Simpson, A. (2014). Mohawk interruptus: Political life across the borders of settler states.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
34. Solomon, C. Computer environments for children: A reflection on theories of learning and
education. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Tarlo, E. (2016). Entanglement: The secret lives of hair. London, UK: Oneworld
Publications.
36. Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of
community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation grant #1640014 and
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not
necessarily represent those of NSF or RPI.