See you next in AESOP 2018 Conference, Gothenburg, 10-14 July 2018!
TRACK 10 – EDUCATION_SESSION 8
Planning Education, Pedagogy and Didactics III
Creative Networked urban Design Studio: Transforming Elaionas through collaborative, reseacrh-based pedagogical approaches
Marda, N., Ioannou, O.
The paper describes a research and practice teaching methodology developed for an urban design studio at undergraduate and postgraduate level and how it transformed the teaching and learning experience. The area considered in both cases was Elaionas; a degraded, chaotic, post-industrial landscape near the Athens centre. The aim was to engage students in city planning creatively through the use of innovative tools of academic research and collaborative field work in order to interpret and manage urban complexity. A series of transdisciplinary analytic tools were employed for mapping such as tracking technologies and spatial analysis, design software and programming, while at the same time artists engaged students in the lived experience of the place. Live encounters were also realized with public sector representatives and other stakeholders.
Course content was set up as a network of researchers and resources where learning is rhizomatic and therefore collaborative and contextual. In this framework, students were required to choose the resources they were interested in pursuing further and to form their own strategies; they were asked to establish connections with the local community; they were also encouraged to share and compare their findings and their respective representations via blogging and social networks thus creating their own creative networked research community. Enhancing communication between students, experts and stakeholders raised student awareness and created an environment of possibilities. As a result, their plans for the regeneration of Elaionas demonstrated a positive attitude by involving local communities and other institutional agents toward the creation of sustainable urban environments.
Image available here
From the WeMakeTheCity Festival website:
Jan Rothuizen loves to map his surroundings, drawing more than streets and buildings: he shows how people experience the city and visualises the atmosphere and the diversity of the population. He also includes economic and social changes of neighbourhoods. Amsterdam is a wonderful playground, as the city changes every day, on a large and small scale. Rothuizen witnesses and documents these changes with his very personal wit and enthusiasm.
The WeMakeThe.City Festival will be hosted in Pakhuis de Zwijger between 20-24 June.
I am delighted to be part of Architecture of Connection: Design Solutions for Urban Loneliness on Thursday 21st of June in Amsterdam with Α10 collaborators Anna Yudina, Omer Kanipak and Joakim Skajaa along with Stefanie Heublein and Peter van Asche.
1984: twenty people from MIT and Paul Cashman of Digital Equipment Corporation organized a workshop to explore technology’s role in the work environment. they used the term CSCW to describe their findings
Office Automation, an earlier approach to group support, had ran out of steam. The problems were not just technical but understanding human requirements. OA practitioners needed more info on how people worked in groups.
CSCW: it started as an effort by technologists to learn from economists, social psychologists, anthropologists, org theorists, educators etc/ it became a place for system builders to share experiences and tell others about tech constraints through tele-videoconferencing, collaborative authorship applications, electronic mail.
CSCW draws from all rings and from preexisting development culture. There is however, a great interest in small groups applications. Product developers focus more on human-computer interface/ Organizational system developers fixate on functionality.
The greatest challenge of CSCW is being multidisciplinary: it represents a merging of issues, approaches, languages, making sense is a lively process. It can be frustrating when the others are ignorant of work one considers to be basic. Participants from different domains use the same terms in subtly different ways.
References + Image
Grudin, J., 1994. Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: History and Focus. In Journal Computer, Volume 27 Issue 5, May 1994, Page 19-26, available here
NETWORKED LEARNING DEFINITIONS
- Goodyear, 2005: Networked learning is learning in which information and communications (ICT) is used to promote connections: between one learner and other learners, between learners and tutors; between a learning community and its learning resources.
- Ryberg et al., 2012: the ideas of relations and connections suggest that learning is not confined to the individual mind or the individual learner. Rather, learning and knowledge construction is located in the connections and interactions between learners, teachers and resources, and seen as emerging from critical dialogues and enquiries. It seems to encompass an understanding of learning as a social, relational phenomenon, and a view of knowledge and identity as constructed through interaction and dialogue
- Jones, 2008: networked learning aligns well with social practice, socio-cultural or social learning theories that also situate and analyse learning as located in social practice and interaction, rather than as a phenomenon of the individual mind.
PLEs perils in regard to
- Experience: may threaten or loosen the shared experience of studying a course
- Exposure to diversity: may encourage a narrow private view
- Privacy: user behavior may adapt to the perceived requirements of a sytem
- Content: it overemphasizes delivery of personalized content at the expense of communication with others (Dirckinck-Holmfeld and Jones, 2009)
Ryberg, T., Buus, L., & Georgsen, M., 2012. Differences in understandings of networked learning theory: Connectivity or collaboration? In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the Theory, Pedagogy and Practice of Networked Learning (pp. 43-58). Springer Science+Business Media B.V., DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-0496-5_3
Image available here
The map—a rectangular plot—was parceled into four quadrants, each devoted to a unique view by which to read, and act upon, the world: Science, Engineering, Design and Art. According to (John) Maeda, to each plot a designated mission: to Science, exploration; to Engineering, invention; to Design, communication; to Art, expression. Describing the four “hats” of creativity, Rich Gold had originally drawn the matrix-as-cartoon to communicate four discrete embodiments of creativity and innovation. Mark your mindset, conquer its little acre, and settle in. Gold’s view represents four ways-of-being that are distinctly different from one another, separated by clear intellectual boundaries and mental dispositions. Like the Four Humors, each is regarded as its own substance, to each its content and its countenance. Stated differently, if you’re a citizen in one, you’re a tourist in another.
Oxman, N., 2016. Age of Entanglement. In JoDS, Vol. 1, January 2016. Mentioned here
Image available here
a deep approach is where the intention of the learner is to understand the meaning of the material/ a surface approach to learning is where a learner is concerned to memorise the material for what it is/ between the two there is a continuum with an hierarchy of stages:
- noticing: representation is reproduction
- making sense: representation is coherent reproduction
- making meaning: representation is of ideas that are integrated and well linked (beginnings of deeper approach)
- working with meaning: representation is reflective, well structured and demonstrates the linking of material with other ideas which may change as a result
- transformative learning: representation demonstrates strong restructuring of ideas and ability to evaluate the processes of reaching that learning
REFLECTION has a role in the deeper approaches/ we learn from representing learning/ we upgrade learning/ Reflection:
- slows down activity, giving the learner time to process
- helps the learners to develop greater ownership of the learning material
- it encourages meta-cognition
- works with materials that are complicated and ill structured and helps students improve their cognitive ability
Moon, J., 2001. PDP Working Paper 4: Reflection in Higher Education Learning. In LTSN Generic Centre, full article available here
Image is Kolb’s circle Experiential Learning concept (1984) available here