Editorial: Advancing posthumanist perspectives on technology-rich learning
Editorial: Advancing posthumanist perspectives on technology-rich learning
复制标题
社论：推进后人文主义对技术丰富的学习的看法
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
A. Keune
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Peppler;J. Rowsell;A. Keune
方法论的方法使得有可能捕捉和评估学生的知识进步。本文试图通过对知识构建话语的后人类主义扭曲来扩展学习科学中的规范概念和隐喻。作者建立在这些人文学科与STEAM和扫盲研究的交叉点上。开始，有关于后人类主义技术设计的见解，如Sintonen对材料隐喻的描述和对数字材料独特品质的深入研究，以及Metho等人对物质存在的描述。除此之外，Leander和Buriss对沉浸式数字领域中人类和非人类内部行为的批判性透镜，以及解开和揭示潜在议程、偏见和意识形态的必要性。其次，谢里丹等人呼吁承认我们对问题的道德责任，并最终承认年轻一代似乎更适应于非人类世界的不确定性和脆弱性。Eglash等人指出了土着传统中的物质崇敬，以及作为教育工作者，我们对土着与物质相处的方式的更深层次的尊重是多么重要。最后，所有的文章都提到了教育研究者在当代必须面对和回应的方法论问题。Oshima和他的同事们展示了学习如何不仅仅是头脑中的东西，而是跨系统连接的，研究人员需要找到识别和探索这些系统的方法。Kumpulainen和Kajamaa强调了孩子们在物质方面的知识和智慧的深度，以及他们在一起工作，在他们一起制造和成为材料和技术时的知识和智慧。在这些文章中有一些强大的东西，指出人们是如何与事情纠缠在一起的，最终，这些纠缠提供了出现和成为的空间。
The methodological approach makes it possible to capture and evaluate students’ knowledge improvements. This article seeks to extend canonical notions and metaphors within the learning sciences by adopting a posthumanist twist to knowledge-building discourses. The authors build on intersections of these humanities to STEAM and literacy studies. To begin with, there are insights about posthumanist technology design, such as Sintonen’s account of material metaphors and a deep dive into unique qualities of digital materialities as well as Metho et al’s account of being with matter. Add to this Leander and Buriss’ critical lens on human and non-human intra-actions within immersive digital domains and the necessity to unravel and unwrap underlying agendas, biases, and ideologies. Secondly, there is something profound about Sheridan et al’s call to acknowledge our ethical responsibilities to matter and ultimately, the ways that younger generations often seem more attuned to the uncertainties and vulnerabilities of more-than-human worlds. Eglash et al point to material reverence within Indigenous traditions and how essential it is for us as educators to develop deeper respect of Indigenous ways of being with matter. Finally, all of the articles address methodological imperatives that educational researchers must face and respond to at this contemporary moment. Oshima and colleagues show how learning is not something that is solely in mind, but rather connected across systems, and researchers need ways to identify and explore these systems. Kumpulainen and Kajamaa spotlight the depth of knowledge and wisdom children have with matter and as they work together to figure out materials and technologies as they make and become together. There is something powerful across these articles that points to how entangled people are with the matter and ultimately, the ways that these entanglements offer spaces of emergence and becoming.