The Matter of Space: Bodily Performances and the Emergence of Boundary Objects During Multidisciplinary Design Meetings

Jornet, Alfredo; Steier, Rolf

doi:10.1080/10749039.2015.1024794

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Imaginative activity thus involves working with the representational affordances of a given setting, and the flexibility to allow the expression and exploration of alternative situations that differ from that of the immediate "reality". Characterizing imagination as materially and physically situated implies that imagining depends on attention to features and resources of the local environment (Hutchins, 2010;Jornet & Steier, 2015). In other words, a learner's ability to explore possibilities and to bring new ideas into the world depends to a great extent on the ways that aspects of the setting can be productively appropriated in order to depict these ideas.…”

Section: Imagining With Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increasingly, however, disciplinary forms of imagining are recognized and developed. For example, in architecture (Murphy, 2004) and exhibition design (Jornet & Steier, 2015), designers often engage in "embedded skits" as a strategy for acting out and performing the experience of being in a future space. These performances allow participants to consider the implications of design decisions in the present by collectively imagining their outcomes.…”

Section: Imagining With Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Imagining with improvised representations in CSCL environments

Steier

Kersting

Silseth

2019

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study contributes to our understanding of meaning making in CSCL environments by examining a specific aspect of collaborative problem solving in which students improvise, introduce, and make meaning with representations in disciplinary domains. These situations include the embodied and imaginative processes of discovering new representational possibilities and artifact meanings. Much of the research on student-generated representations examines situations in which students are asked by a teacher or researcher explicitly to produce representations. However, we need more knowledge about how students within CSCL settings introduce representations from outside of the designed environment or intended task in order to solve a problem. To unpack the processes of collaborative improvisation and meaning making, we take a sociocultural stance towards imagining. This stance involves considering the socially and materially situated ways that participants express new possibilities and alternative situations that extend beyond the present reality. Focusing on a specific task based on maps as disciplinary representations, we analyze video data of upper secondary physics students working in small groups in a co-located CSCL environment. To characterize shifts across boundaries of several modalities including the verbal and gestural, digital and physical, and two-dimensional and three-dimensional, we identify emergent representations as imaginative productions. The findings extend current research on collaborative meaning making by bringing attention to the processes through which improvised representations emerge. This knowledge is key to facilitating the discovery of representational possibilities in CSCL environments.

show abstract

Section: Imagining With Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Imagining With Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imagining with improvised representations in CSCL environments

Steier

Kersting

Silseth

2019

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Along with the four initial types of BOs proposed by Star and Griesemer (1989), researchers working in different disciplinary traditions distinguish additional kinds of BOs and boundaries, for instance: (Macpherson, Jones, & Oakes, 2006) archival standards (Yakel, 2004) cancer (as a conceptual artifact) (Fujimura, 1992) community information (Westbrook & Finn, 2012) concepts (Langenohl, 2008;Ridenour, 2016) design concepts (Eriksson, 2008) digital literacy (Huvila, 2012b) documents (Huvila, 2012a;Østerlund, 2008a) gender (Burnett et al, 2009a(Burnett et al, , 2009b) genre (Østerlund, 2008b) group affiliations (Lindberg & Czarniawska, 2006) information services (Huvila, 2012b) medicine (Frost, Reich, & Fujisaki, 2002) metaphors (Koskinen, 2005) methods (Olsen, Lund, Ellingsen, & Hartvigsen, 2012) musical scores (Winget, 2008) ontologies (Shepherd & Sampalli, 2012) policies (Emad & Roth, 2009) repositories and digital libraries (Star & Griesemer, 1989;Van House, 2003;Worrall, 2015) room/space (Jornet & Steier, 2015) technical standards, geographic information systems (GIS) (Harvey & Chrisman, 1998) visual representations (Henderson, 1991) water (Carroll, 2012) • Boundary-objects-in-use/designated BOs: Objects that are useful in different communities and that acquire a status as a BO; objects that are specifically promoted as boundary bridging instruments, for example, by management (Levina & Vaast, 2005).…”

Section: Concept Of Boundary Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…activities (Macpherson et al, 2006) archival standards (Yakel, 2004) cancer (as a conceptual artefact) (Fujimura, 1992) community information (Westbrook & Finn, 2012) concepts (Langenohl, 2008;Ridenour, 2016) design concepts (Eriksson, 2008) digital literacy (Huvila, 2012b) documents (Huvila, 2012;Østerlund, 2008a) gender (Burnett et al, 2009) genre (Østerlund, 2008b) group affiliations (Lindberg & Czarniawska, 2006) information services (Huvila, 2012b) medicine (Frost et al, 2002) metaphors (Koskinen, 2005) methods (Olsen et al, 2012) musical scores (Winget, 2008) ontologies (Shepherd & Sampalli, 2012) policies (Emad & Roth, 2009) repositories and digital libraries (Star & Griesemer, 1989;Van House, 2003;Worrall, 2015) room / space (Jornet & Steier, 2015) technical standards, geographic information systems (GIS) (Harvey & Chrisman., 1998) visual representations (Henderson, 1991) water (Carroll, 2012) Organized along disciplinary lines in the fields of anthropology of design, sociology of science, and organization theory, Trompette & Vinck (2009) offer a partial inventory of research topics for which the concept BO was put to use. Their review takes account of the diverse authorship and research applications of the concept and although it is not a critical review of the literature it provides a topical map.…”

Section: Artefact Referencementioning

confidence: 99%

Boundary objects in information science

Huvila

Anderson

Jansen

et al. 2017

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Boundary objects are abstract or physical artefacts that exist in the liminal spaces between adjacent communities of people. The theory of BOs was originally introduced by Star and Griesemer in a study on information practices at the Berkeley Museum of Vertebrate Zoology but has since been adapted in a broad range of research contexts in a large number of disciplines including the various branches of information science. The aim of this review article is to present an overview of the state of the art of information science research informed by the theory of BOs, critically discuss the notion, and propose a structured overview of how the notion has been applied in the study of information.

show abstract

“…We argue that they use the bodily-material resources as 1) a communicative and illustrative resource for showing each other their understandings, 2) a cognitive auxiliary tool scaffolding knowledge building, and 3) a way of shepherding (Cekaite, 2010) and instructing each other. Further, we discuss how we view this as particularly relevant to the (re)growing interest in co-located collaborative environments (Higgins, Mercier, Burd, & Joyce-Gibbons, 2011) within CSCL and a more general interest in the role bodily-material resources play in learning, interaction, and collaboration (Alibali & Nathan, 2012;De Freitas & Sinclair, 2014, Jornet & Steier, 2015Jornet & Roth, 2015;Lindwall & Ekström, 2012;Majlesi, 2014). Thus, our study forms part of what could be termed the bodily turn in learning and within CSCL, and adds to our current understanding of learning, interaction and collaboration by explicating the intricate ways bodily-material resources are used in meaning-making practices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“This is the size of one meter”: Children’s bodily-material collaboration

Davidsen

Ryberg

2017

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In CSCL studies, language is often foregrounded as the primary resource for engaging in collaborative learning, while the body is more often positioned as a secondary resource. There is, however, a growing interest in the body as a resource in learning and collaboration in and outside CSCL. In this paper, we present, analyse, and discuss how two nine-year-old children collaborate through gesturing and moving their bodies around a touchscreen. The pair is working with the concept of scale and area measurement and are in midst of copying their rooms from paper to touchscreen. During this process, the pair engages in a discussion regarding the size of one meter through language, gestures and manipulation of the material resources. The analysis shows two distinct ways of understanding the length of one meter, which primarily are visible through the children's gestures and bodily movements. In the analysis we show how the children dynamically produce bodymaterial resources for communicative and illustrative purposes; moreover, they use body-material resources as a cognitive tool and as a way of shepherding each other. The study forms part of a body of studies analysing and theorizing the body in education, learning, and interaction. We discuss the wider impact of our findings and argue how they may challenge and improve studies relying mainly on a coding and counting approach or automated capture of e.g. gestures. In addition, we provide a detailed multimodal representation of the subtle bodily-material resources, which we argue is a modest contribution to a catalogue of ways of representing and making bodily-material resources visible in CSCL research. Keywordsbodily-material resources for learning * embodied meaning-making practices * touchscreens * video analysis * concept of scale "When the proportions of architectural composition are applied to a particular building, the two-termed relationship of the parts to the whole must be harmonized with a third term-the observer. He not only sees the proportions of a door and their relationship to those of a wall (as he would in a drawing of the building), but he measures them against his own dimensions. This threetermed relationship is called scale." (Britannica Online Encyclopedia, 2014).

show abstract

The Matter of Space: Bodily Performances and the Emergence of Boundary Objects During Multidisciplinary Design Meetings

Cited by 22 publications

References 30 publications

Imagining with improvised representations in CSCL environments

Imagining with improvised representations in CSCL environments

Boundary objects in information science

“This is the size of one meter”: Children’s bodily-material collaboration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About