Skip to main content

paths in the grass: a visual metaphor for virtual architecture


This image from my PhD thesis uses a minimal stereotyped image of a college campus as a visual metaphor to describe a space of emergent learning.  This idea is expanded upon in the "Patterns of Peeragogy" paper, which uses a similar metaphor:
This image is of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where I've been several times.  It still looks somewhat similar to the picture, though a bit more built up!

The concept here is that the common-place architectural structures that have emerged at the university represent meaningful "patterns" that apply in more general learning-and-production settings.
Collegial and convivial peer support via remote collaboration or short-term meet-ups may fill some of the requirements of “student life”. Peeragogy can also happen in neighborhoods, and among persons sharing long-term co-habitation. While a traditional Dormitory may not be necessary, a shared rented or cooperatively-owned living/working environment could be an asset for peeragogues working together on A SPECIFIC PROJECT (Figure 7).
Here I'd like to draw attention to the "Quad", an in some sense under-determined physical space that sits in the "middle" of the various already-emerged architectural features.  Although it has some meaning relative to those features, and is not simply an empty space, it is also something of a blank slate, on which traces of momentary action and interaction may be temporarily observed.  Sometimes these structures will thicken into new structures, for example new buildings or paved-over paths.  As a campus (or city, or other social structure) becomes more developed, these "patterns" become increasingly solid.  Even a formerly blank slate becomes constrained (e.g., in its definition as a "common space").
I propose that some version of the first set of images above could be used to organise the existing posts on this blog and our ancillary writings, e.g., using CMap Tools, so that we get a high-level view of the structure that has emerged here.

The "Context/Nonlinear/Feedback/Metalearning/Roadmap" framework should be "harmonised" with Dan Harmon's outline and the Aboriginal yarning framework described previously.  We could use a "4-up" framework to wind a longer "rope" of meanings out of the various threads that have developed here so far.

From http://howdidyoumakethis.com/square-pin-loom-speed-weaving/
I think that this sort of "emerged" outline would be very useful for subsequent writing projects -- it would complement the more rigid frameworks that come from Harmon et al.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Extra channels

In the following, I would like to clarify the connection between channel and context and concomitantly the difference between metachannel and parachannel . Paul Kockelman urges us "to notice the fundamental similarity between codes and channels" (2011: 725) but instead of that purported fundamental similarity points out the contrast between them. I argue that context , or objects and states of affairs (Bühler 2011[1934]: 35), demonstrate a closer relationship to channel than to code. This is largely because the first three fundamental relations, sender or subject , context or object , and receiver or addressee , belong to Bühler's original organon model while code , contact and message , which were previously implicit in the organon model, are made explicit as additions to the model by Jakobson (1985[1976c]). Thus the most productive approach would be to pair a component from the original organon model with an additional component in the language functions model.

Metacommunicative cues

In the previous post on Extra channels I finished with a distinction between diachronic and synchronic metacommunication. In this post I'd like to respond to some comments by the co-author of this blog, Joe, in some of his previous posts, by invoking Jurgen Ruesch's concept of metacommunication . Gregory Bateson was interested in thinking about cybernetics, but didn't seem to feel constrained to think about it using a strictly computational or information-theoretic paradigm, while still being informed by the ideas. This gave him the freedom to talk about ideas like "context", "relationship", "learning", and "communication" without needing to define them in precise computational terms. Nevertheless, he handles the ideas fairly rigorously. (Joe, Phatic Workshop: towards a μ-calculus ) Gregory Bateson and Jurgen Ruesch, among many other notable thinkers, were part of the Palo Alto Group of researchers tasked to apply new methods (a

RJ schematized

I schematized Roman Jakobson's definition of the phatic function, and upon looking at it for a while thought that I either drew a fish or a side-view of Jakobson's face, the left column being either a back-fin or Einsteinian scientist-hair, and the upper triangle in both cases serving as an eye. I'm slowly making progress with the paper on RJ's phatic function.