# data[].attributes.headline
Tracing connections and following the action: How sociomaterial, and postdigital sensibilities help us appreciate the learning whole in action

# data[].attributes.subject
Tracing connections and following the action: How sociomaterial, and postdigital sensibilities help us appreciate the learning whole in action

# data[].attributes.headline
Capturing material-driven learning: Methods derived from taking on posthumanist perspectives for the study of learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Capturing material-driven learning: Methods derived from taking on posthumanist perspectives for the study of learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Capturing material-driven learning: Methods derived from taking on posthumanist perspectives for the study of learning Anna Keune Technical University Munich School of Social Sciences and Technology Department of Educational Sciences TUM Institute for Advanced Study ISLS Annual Meeting 2024 – Sym…

# data[].attributes.headline
Reinterpreting new technologies in a maker classroom to convey the dynamics of social technological interventions

# data[].attributes.subject
Reinterpreting new technologies in a maker classroom to convey the dynamics of social technological interventions

# data[].attributes.headline
Residue-learner-network assemblages across space and time

# data[].attributes.subject
Residue-learner-network assemblages across space and time

# data[].attributes.body
One thing I’ve been grappling with is how to blend the elemental (i.e., individual) and systemic (i.e., groups and classrooms) perspectives of learning and research. As Nathan and Sawyer (2022) note, “elemental perspectives focus on the role of component elements of a complex learning environment and as such they rely on the factoring assumption: they assume that any components of the learning system (such as context) can be ‘factored out’ and analyzed independently” (p. 36). Research guided by systemic perspectives “include a system-level unit of analysis, because knowledge and learning is conceived of as a property and a process that takes place at the whole system level” (p. 37). Sociomateriality is more aligned with a systemic perspective but I often find that our research questions and methodological approaches try to apply the factoring assumption to test hypotheses and generate new knowledge.

Nathan, M. J., & Sawyer, R. K. (2022). Foundations of the Learning Sciences. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 27-52). Cambridge University Press.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Residue-learner-network assemblages across space and time

# data[].attributes.body
I'm interested in exploring the possibility of using it to examine the hybridity of learning spaces as enabled through digital tools & technologies. For example in Hyflex or similarly described learning spaces where there are learners in a physical space (eg, classroom) and learners are participating remotely (eg, via Zoom). How does that change the nature of learning interactions and processes? How does it complicate collaborative learning designs and experiences? What questions does it raise pertaining to equity and inclusion?

Social annotation - I'm also interested in exploring how one of these two analytical lenses could be used to analyze learning activities & teaching practices facilitated by social annotation tools (e.g., https://web.hypothes.is/). For example, how are the annotations and comments that students and teachers make in the margins of a digital document (eg, as a reading assignment/homework) used to drive and shape discussion during sessions that occur in a physical, co-located classroom (ie, in-person discussions)? In what ways do the material artifacts existing in the stream of comments and annotations shaping the perceptions and interpretations of learners?

# data[].attributes.body
I am trying to understand how creativity emerge and transcend in makerspaces by focusing on encounters among makers and materials (with collaborative design problem solving as the context) by using the idea of " design as a conversation, material "talk backs" and "turns"

-alekh

# data[].attributes.headline
Discussing learning as a materialist process

# data[].attributes.subject
Discussing learning as a materialist process

# data[].attributes.body
Learning is always difficult to define. How do we define learning in terms of practice, identities, and ontologies?

# data[].attributes.body
I see the specificity and complexity in the relations of human and non-human elements in the learning and the phenomena of creativity( in my work ). But I am struggling to put theses insights in generalized form. Or is it recommended to keep the insights at the level of specificity.

Also, I struggle to put the insights to write and communicate with others, in terms of vocabulary and language.

-alekh

# data[].attributes.headline
Who is defining or "seeing" the influence of materials?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who is defining or "seeing" the influence of materials?

# data[].attributes.body
I've be grappling with using sociomateriality as an onto-epistemological frame for the research - i.e. researcher can analyze X data to attend to sociomaterial factors - versus the perception of sociomaterial influence by participants - i.e. learners discussing the influence or agency of materials they are interacting with. In other words, when and where is sociomateriality a participant concern/priority and how, if at all, might distinguishing between researcher identified versus participant identified sociomaterial factors shape our understanding and design for learning - Megan Goeke

# data[].attributes.body
I am interested in the affordances that hybrid and HyFlex pedagogy brings to the learner’s experience. If we claim that education is a right for all, then we have to recognise that traditional campus-based/exclusive education is a barrier to that right. Campus-exclusive education is not education for all, it is education for all abled-enough bodied learners who can be present on campus at a particular time. Education should not be contingent on a geolocation. Campus-exclusive education is excluding individuals that cannot be present on campus for whatever reason (be it because of physical challenges, because of family obligations or because of cultural obligations). Some learners have to incur greater costs and commitments to be present on campus, so there is another inequality at that level. For example, in Canada, many students from our indigenous community live in remote areas. Attending higher education for these students often involves uprooting themselves from their communities and absorbing more living costs (moving expenses) than local students don’t have to contend with.

How do we address this? This is a a complex situation that involves many stakeholders: learning scientists, institutions, and policy makers but just as importantly (if not more) we must include the voices of the learners that have been excluded by the hypocrisy and tyranny of the campus.

I guess that also addresses questions 2.

-Selma Hamdani Dawson College/ SALTISE

# data[].attributes.body
Is there an element considering how to help students/collaborators develop awareness of the sociomaterial configuration of their spaces and work?

# data[].attributes.body
There are differences and also commonalities – if our own work is distributed across time and space (including time zones!). And even in this very situation of this presentation, we draw on materials and the digital around us to enable this very conversation.