CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Science Education and PedagogyArt Education and DevelopmentInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Luminous Science: Teachers Designing For and Developing Transdisciplinary Thinking and Learning

Open access
Finch, Lila, Moreno, Celeste, Shapiro, R. Benjamin·2021·Cognition and Instruction
DOI 10.1080/07370008.2021.1945064
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Creating learning environments that integrate arts, sciences, and computing in education can improve learning in these disciplines. In particular, transdisciplinary integrations of these disciplines can lead to expansive alterations or dissolutions of epistemological, ideological, and methodological boundaries. We wish to support teachers in the creation of transdisciplinary learning environments that draw on art, science, and computing. We developed a classroom project genre, Luminous Science, that was designed to bridge disciplinary materialities, epistemologies, and representations through students’ construction of computationally-rich representations of physical phenomena. We present a study of a multidisciplinary group of teachers co-designing a Luminous Science unit for their classrooms using sculptural lanterns with programmable media for both investigations and expressions of classroom gardens. We present a framework for examining what disciplinary understandings teachers drew on, how these ideas were utilized, and why they were brought together. We found teachers engaged in richly metarepresentational discussions wherein they applied values, epistemic criteria, and practices from all three constituent fields of study in their design work. We show how teachers developed units that simultaneously overlapped and diverged due to the pressures of navigating disciplinary and school structural challenges. Qualitative analysis of teacher discourse reveals how teachers libera…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07370008.2021.1945064

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Research on arts, science and computing teachers collaboratively creating a learning environment shows how they were able to combine their disciplinary interests, values, epistemic criteria, and practices efficiently in their design work.

    “Research on arts, science and computing teachers collaboratively creating a learning environment shows how they were able to combine their disciplinary interests, values, epistemic criteria, and practices efficiently in their design work (Finch et al., 2021).”

    From Educational Participatory Design in the Crossroads of Histories and Practices – Aiming for Digital Transformation in Language Pedagogy (2023) · cites this paper as Finch et al., 2021

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 131

  1. 10.4324/9781315617572-10 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/2960310.2960325 · DOI
  3. 10.1007/978-94-007-0449-7_10 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/0018726704043893 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/00461520.2015.1075402 · DOI
  6. 10.1002/tea.21204 · DOI
  7. 10.1177/0170840610380802 · DOI
  8. Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press.
  9. Blikstein P. (2013). Gears of our childhood: Constructionist toolkits robotics and physical computing past and future. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '13) (pp. 173–182). New York (NY): ACM. · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1007/978-981-4560-96-2_15 · DOI
  11. 10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_8 · DOI
  12. 10.3200/CHNG.37.1.14-21 · DOI
  13. 10.3152/147154406781776075 · DOI
  14. 10.3726/978-1-4539-0941-6 · DOI
  15. 10.1177/0896920508093365 · DOI
  16. 10.1145/3372782.3406268 · DOI
  17. 10.1007/s10956-015-9574-4 · DOI
  18. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (1st ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  19. 10.1080/00043125.2020.1717818 · DOI
  20. 10.1080/10632913.2017.1292973 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/sce.20166 · DOI
  22. Dasgupta, S., Hale, W., Monroy-Hernández, A., & Hill, B. M. (2016, February). Remixing as a pathway to computational thinking. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. San Francisco, CA, USA, 1438–1449.
  23. 10.1080/00043125.2020.1717823 · DOI
  24. 10.1080/10508400903452884 · DOI
  25. DesPortes, K., Spells, M., & DiSalvo, B. (2016, February). The MoveLab: Developing congruence between students' self-concepts and computing. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education. Memphis, TN, USA 267–272.
  26. 10.1080/00131728609335764 · DOI
  27. 10.1002/sce.21217 · DOI
  28. 10.7551/mitpress/1786.001.0001 · DOI
  29. 10.1207/s1532690xci2203_2 · DOI
  30. DiSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117–160.
  31. 10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.007 · DOI
  32. 10.1007/978-3-319-06526-7 · DOI
  33. Eisner, E. W. (2002). What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education? Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 4–16.
  34. 10.1007/s11251-020-09518-1 · DOI
  35. 10.1177/016146811311501415 · DOI
  36. 10.1145/2445196.2445304 · DOI
  37. 10.17763/haer.83.1.a78q39699078ju20 · DOI
  38. 10.3402/jac.v8.29934 · DOI
  39. 10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100 · DOI
  40. Gordon, L. (2006). Disciplinary decadence: Living thought in trying times. New York, NY: Routledge.
  41. 10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1_17 · DOI
  42. 10.3102/0013189X12463051 · DOI
  43. 10.1080/00043125.2013.11519203 · DOI
  44. 10.1080/00043125.2014.11519293 · DOI
  45. Guzdial, M. (2003, June). A media computation course for non-majors. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education. Thessaloniki, Greece, 104–108.
  46. 10.1207/S15327884MCA0903_03 · DOI
  47. Halverson, E. R. (2012). Participatory media spaces: A design perspective on learning with media and technology in the twenty-first century. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, Learning, and Society (pp. 241–268). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  48. 10.1080/10508406.2011.639471 · DOI
  49. 10.2307/1320729 · DOI
  50. 10.1080/00043125.2020.1717822 · DOI
  51. Herrenkohl, L. R., Lund, K. S., Polman, J. L., Radinsky, J., Suthers, D., & Tabak, I. (2018). Life-long life-wide learning within and beyond the disciplines. In J. Kay & Luckin, R. (Eds.), Rethinking learning in the digital age: Making the learning sciences count, 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (pp. 1290–1295). London: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  52. 10.4324/9781315617572-11 · DOI
  53. Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. M. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  54. 10.1080/00043125.2020.1746161 · DOI
  55. 10.1002/aehe.3502 · DOI
  56. 10.1353/pmc.1990.0004 · DOI
  57. Ito, M., Horst, H., Brittani, M., Boyd, d., Herr-Stephenson, B., Lange, P. G., … Robinson, L. (2008). Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth project. Chicago, IL: MacArthur Foundation.
  58. Jackson, D. W., Zhang, H., & Barnett, M. (2019). Board 69: Integrating computational thinking, engineering design, and environmental science through smart greenhouses. Paper presented at ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Tampa, FL.
  59. Jacobs J. & Buechley L. (2013). Codable objects: Computational design and digital fabrication for novice programmers. Paper presented at Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). Paris France 1589–1598. · DOI
  60. Jansen, Y., Dragicevic, P., Isenberg, P., Alexander, J., Karnik, A., Kildal, J., … Hornbaek, K. (2015). Opportunities and challenges for data physicalization. Paper presented at CHI 2015 - Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
  61. 10.1023/A:1009777905226 · DOI
  62. 10.3102/0091732X10383211 · DOI · Paper page
  63. 10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.03.004 · DOI
  64. 10.3402/rlt.v23.26496 · DOI
  65. Krakauer, D. C. (2011). Transscience: Disciplines and the advance of plenary knowledge. SFI Bulletin, 25, 1–3.
  66. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  67. 10.7208/chicago/9780226217239.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  68. 10.1177/1365480213519517 · DOI
  69. 10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_18 · DOI
  70. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  71. 10.2307/j.ctv167563f · DOI
  72. 10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_5 · DOI
  73. Madden, P. E., Wong, C., Vera Cruz, A. C., Olle, C. D., & Barnett, M. (2017). Social justice driven STEM learning (STEMJ): A curricular framework for teaching STEAM in a social justice driven, urban, college access program. Catalyst: A Social Justice Forum, 7(1), 24–37.
  74. 10.5642/steam.201301.34 · DOI
  75. 10.3102/0013189X017002013 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
  77. Montessori, M. (1912). The absorbent mind (Claude A. Claremont, trans.). New York, NY: Dell Pub. Co.
  78. 10.1007/978-1-4419-0312-9_1 · DOI
  79. Nicolescu, B. (2005). Transdisciplinary—Past, present and future. Vitoria: Centro de Educacao Transdisciplinar.
  80. Nikitina, S. (2002). Three Strategies for interdisciplinary teaching: Contextualizing, conceptualizing, and problem-solving. In Interdisciplinary Studies Project Project Zero. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
  81. Odden, O. B., & Russ, R. S. (2018). Defining sensemaking: Bringing clarity to a fragmented theoretical construct. Science Education, 103(1), 1–19.
  82. Oh H. Hsi S. Eisenberg M. & Gross M. D. (2018). Paper mechatronics: Present and future. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children Trondheim (pp. 389–395). · DOI
  83. 10.1007/978-3-319-64301-4_8 · DOI
  84. Ozkan, G., & Topsakal, U. U. (2020). Investigating the effectiveness of STEAM education on students' conceptual understanding of force and energy topics. Research in Science and Educational Education. 1–20.
  85. Papert, S. A. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  86. 10.1007/s10956-016-9678-5 · DOI
  87. 10.1109/MC.2013.257 · DOI
  88. 10.4324/9781315726496-13 · DOI
  89. 10.1007/s10956-012-9428-2 · DOI
  90. 10.1080/10632913.2017.1316331 · DOI
  91. 10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001 · DOI
  92. 10.1002/sce.21180 · DOI
  93. 10.1002/tea.20415 · DOI
  94. 10.1007/s11422-019-09922-1 · DOI
  95. Reiser B. J. (2013). What professional development strategies are needed for successful implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards? Paper presented at the Invitational Research Symposium on Science Assessment. Washington D.C. 1–22.
  96. Russ, R. S., Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., & Hutchinson, P. (2008). Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking. Science Studies and Science Education, 93(5), 876–891.
  97. 10.1080/10508406.2013.778204 · DOI
  98. 10.1109/MC.2006.58 · DOI
  99. Schunn, C. D. (2017). Scientific sensemaking: A critical resource for science learning in school. Education, 20(8), 1467–1468.
  100. Searle K. A. & Kafai Y. B. (2015 July). Boys' needlework: Understanding gendered and indigenous perspectives on computing and crafting with electronic textiles. Paper presented at the International Computing Education Research Conference (ICER). Omaha Nebraska pp. 31–39. · DOI
  101. 10.1007/978-3-319-93566-9_4 · DOI
  102. 10.7551/mitpress/11668.001.0001 · DOI
  103. 10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2 · DOI
  104. 10.1145/3017680.3017749 · DOI
  105. 10.1080/10508406.2016.1207541 · DOI
  106. Sheridan, K. M., & Gardner, H. (2012). Artistic development: Three essential spheres. In A. Shimamura & S. Palmer (Eds.), Aesthetic science, connecting minds, brains and experience (pp. 276–296). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  107. 10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1 · DOI
  108. 10.3102/0013189X015002004 · DOI · Paper page
  109. Silander, P. (2015). Digital pedagogy. In P. Mattila, & P. Silander (Eds.), How to create the school of the future: Revolutionary thinking and design from Finland (pp. 9–26). Oulu: University of Oulu, Center for Internet Excellence.
  110. Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  111. 10.21273/HORTTECH.8.4.579 · DOI
  112. Smith G. (2017 September). Generative design for textiles: Opportunities and challenges for entertainment AI. Paper presented at AIIDE (pp. 115–121). Salt Lake City UT. · DOI
  113. 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00655.x · DOI
  114. 10.1016/0362-3319(91)90040-B · DOI
  115. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  116. 10.1080/10749039.2016.1202982 · DOI
  117. Symeonidis, V., & Schwarz, J. F. (2016). Phenomenon-based teaching and learning through the pedagogical lenses of phenomenology: The recent curriculum reform in Finland. Forum Oświatowe, 28(2), 31–47.
  118. 10.1080/03057267.2020.1755802 · DOI
  119. 10.1080/1470329042000208693 · DOI
  120. 10.1007/s10956-017-9688-y · DOI
  121. Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1992). Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 11(1), 3–33.
  122. 10.1080/07370008.2019.1624547 · DOI
  123. 10.2307/3193705 · DOI
  124. Vasquez, J. A., Sneider, C., & Comer, M. (2013). STEM lesson essentials: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
  125. 10.1186/s40594-019-0201-4 · DOI
  126. 10.1002/tea.1017 · DOI
  127. 10.1111/1540_6245.jaac20.4.0429 · DOI
  128. 10.1207/s1532690xci2402_1 · DOI
  129. 10.1023/A:1009421303064 · DOI
  130. Wilensky, U. J., & Stroup, W. (1999). Learning through participatory simulations: Network-based design for systems learning in classrooms. International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS). https://repository.isls.org/bitstream/1/4380/1/935-950.pdf
  131. Zhao J. & Moere A. V. (2008). Embodiment in data sculpture: A model of the physical visualization of information. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (pp. 343–350). Athens Greece. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Finch, L., Moreno, C., & Shapiro, R. B.
Affiliations
University of Colorado Boulder (US)
Corresponding author
Shapiro, R. Benjamin
ORCID
Venue
Cognition and Instruction
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2021-07-05
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
512-560
ISSN
  • 0737-0008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-690X
DOI
10.1080/07370008.2021.1945064
OpenAlex
W3179586443
Cited by
28
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Cognition and Instruction (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Oracle, Inc.
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Keywords
transdisciplinary learning, teacher co-design, science education, computing education, metarepresentation, disciplinary boundaries, teacher professional development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review