• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Making Representations Matter: Understanding Practitioner Experience in Participatory Sensemaking
 

Making Representations Matter: Understanding Practitioner Experience in Participatory Sensemaking

on

  • 3,019 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,019
Views on SlideShare
957
Embed Views
2,062

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
20
Comments
0

43 Embeds 2,062

http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com 1323
http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk 154
http://stadium.open.ac.uk 100
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.in 98
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.co.uk 61
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com.au 55
http://learningemergence.net 53
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ca 43
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com.es 22
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.de 18
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.it 16
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ru 13
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 10
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com.br 10
url_unknown 8
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.sg 6
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.fr 6
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.hk 6
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.nl 6
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.co.il 5
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.co.at 4
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.co.nz 4
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.jp 4
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.be 4
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.pt 3
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.kr 3
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ch 3
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.se 3
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.hu 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.mx 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com.ar 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.sk 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ro 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.dk 2
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ae 1
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.ie 1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 1
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.tw 1
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.cz 1
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.no 1
http://stadium-tmp.open.ac.uk 1
http://knowledgeart.blogspot.fi 1
http://newsconsole.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • more helpful title
  • Emphasiseat this point that while hypermedia exemplifies the next wave of representational functionality that we would expect to see spread, Compendium is just the vehicle for this research, and that your interest is in facilitating the participatory constructionof any representation in any medium
  • this looks more useful – exemplifying high granularity
  • more helpful title
  • Changed the title to Contributions
  • Changed the title to Contributions
  • Changed the title to Contributions
  • Changed the title to Contributions
  • Changed the title to Contributions
  • updated last bullet

Making Representations Matter: Understanding Practitioner Experience in Participatory Sensemaking Making Representations Matter: Understanding Practitioner Experience in Participatory Sensemaking Presentation Transcript

  • 8 June 2011, The Open University
    Making Representations Matter Understanding Practitioner Experience in Participatory Sensemaking
    Al Selvin
    Knowledge Media Institute The Open UniversityMilton Keynes, UK
    and
    Verizon Telecom IT
    Valhalla, NY USA
    http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/selvin
  • What is practitioner sensemaking in participatory representations?
  • Other kinds of participatory representational experiences
    3
  • Everyday participatory representational experiences
    4
    :47
  • Background and motivation
    • Development of the Compendium software, methodology, and practice
    • Ten years of practice experience in business, research, and community settings
    • Desire to find research that talked about the experience of such practice
    • What practitioners encounter in the heat of the moment
    • How they make sense of anomalies and shape representations of value to their participants
    • Characterizing the practice as articulation work
  • Research context
  • Research questions
    • RQ1: How to characterize and compare the interactions of specific representational situations and practitioner actions?
    • RQ2: What kinds of obstacles, breaches, discontinuities, and anomalies occur that interfere with a representation's coherence, engagement, or usefulness?
    • RQ3:How do practitioner actions at sensemaking moments serve to restore coherence, engagement, and usefulness?
    • RQ4: What are the specific practices involved in making the hypermedia aspects of the representation coherent, engaging, and useful?
  • Conceptual framework
    8
  • Conceptual framework
    9
  • Conceptual framework
    10
  • Conceptual framework
    11
  • Other forms of participatory representation also map on
    12
  • Exploratory qualitative approach
    Round 1: Pilot study
    3
    Analysis: Need ways to characterize whole session and context
    Grid and sensemaking moment analyses of two expert in situ sessions
    1
    2
    Initial literature review
    4
    Subjects: Need to contrast with non-expert, non-in situ sessions
    5
    Data: Need skill and experience profiles of practitioners
  • Exploratory qualitative approach
    Round 1: Pilot study
    Round 2: Expanded study
    3
    Analysis: Need ways to characterize whole session and context
    Develop CEU and Shaping analysis tools
    6
    Grid and sensemaking moment analyses of two expert in situ sessions
    1
    2
    Initial literature review
    4
    Subjects: Need to contrast with non-expert, non-in situ sessions
    7
    Conduct Ames and Rutgers sessions
    5
    Data: Need skill and experience profiles of practitioners
    Develop subject questionnaire
    8
    Second literature review
    9
    10
    Analysis: Need way to characterize ‘experience’ dimensions
    14
  • Exploratory qualitative approach
    Round 1: Pilot study
    Round 2: Expanded study
    3
    Analysis: Need ways to characterize whole session and context
    Develop CEU and Shaping analysis tools
    6
    Grid and sensemaking moment analyses of two expert in situ sessions
    1
    2
    Initial literature review
    4
    Subjects: Need to contrast with non-expert, non-in situ sessions
    7
    Conduct Ames and Rutgers sessions
    5
    Data: Need skill and experience profiles of practitioners
    Develop subject questionnaire
    8
    Round 3: Comparative study
    Conduct comparative analysis across sessions
    13
    Second literature review
    9
    Apply all five analysis tools to all eight sessions
    12
    Develop Framing Model analysis tool
    11
    10
    Analysis: Need way to characterize ‘experience’ dimensions
    15
  • Related work
    16
  • Related work
    • Visual representations in communication and group work
    • Engagement with such representations
    • The importance of situation and context in studying practice
    • Analysis at the move-by-move level
    • Limitations of research focused on tools, methods, and outcomes
    17
  • Research settings – Mobile Agents
    Hab Crew
    Remote Science Team
    18
  • Research settings – Ames
    Ames Group 1
    Ames Group 2
    19
    Ames Group 4
    Ames Group 3
  • Research settings – Rutgers
    Rutgers Group 1
    Rutgers Group 2
    20
  • Characteristics of practitioners
    21
  • 22
    Practitioner skills and experience
    Larger plot = greater levels of self-reported skill and experience
  • Analytical tools
    Characterizing the representational characterof the whole sessionWhat kind of shaping took place?
    23
  • Analytical tools
    Characterizing the representational characterof the whole sessionWhat kind of shaping took place?
    AG4 Example
    24
  • Analytical tools
    Mapping the coherence, engagement, and usefulness dimensions of each timeslot to build up a signature for the session
    Aids in identifying sensemaking episodes
    25
  • Analytical tools
    Mapping the coherence, engagement, and usefulness dimensions of each timeslot to build up a signature for the session
    Aids in identifying sensemaking episodes
    AG4 Example
    26
  • Analytical tools
    Rich description of sensemaking episode
    27
  • Analytical tools
    Rich description of sensemaking episode
    AG4 Example
    28
  • Analytical tools
    Micro-moment moves and choices during the episode
    29
  • Analytical tools
    AG4 Example
    Micro-moment moves and choices during the episode
    30
  • Analytical tools
    Characterizing the practitioner actions during the episode in aesthetic, ethical, and experiential terms (informed by theoretical framework)
    31
  • Analytical tools
    AG4 Example
    Characterizing the practitioner actions during the episode in aesthetic, ethical, and experiential terms (informed by theoretical framework)
    32
  • Analytical tools
    Granularity
    Choices/Moves
    Session
    Context(historical,technical, social, etc.)
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Choices/Moves
    Session
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Choices/Moves
    Session
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Choices/Moves
    Timeslot
    Choices/Moves
    Sensemaking Moment & Grid Analysis
    CEUAnalysis
    Shaping & FramingAnalysis
    33
  • 34
    CEU heat maps showing sensemaking episodes
  • 35
    Sensemaking triggers and responses (AG4 example)
    Trigger
    Response
    Pertaining to volume or type of participant input (“Too much too fast”)
    Facilitator: “But we had a question that says ‘how can the public become co-creators?’”Mapper creates Question node and facilitator narrates answers from previous discussion
    Response type: Holding forward progress until new strategy is in place
    Ethical dimension: Direct intervention for purpose of practitioner actionAesthetic dimension: Creating space for remedial shaping to take place
  • Direct collaboration between practitioner and participants
    Hab
    36
  • Sensemaking dimensions
    Practitioner responses (RQ1, 3)
    37
  • Sensemaking dimensions
    Practitioner responses (RQ1, 3)
    AG4
    38
  • Shaping and Framing categories
    Category A – Conducting (RQ1)
    • Overall context, tone, or characterof a session
    Category D – Shaping (RQ1, 4)
    • Physical and conceptual shaping of the representations
    Category B – Planning (RQ1, 3)
    • Initial plan and other pre-session factors
    • Dimensions
    • Advance
    • As-played-out
    Category E – Framing (RQ1, 3)
    • Relating the sessions to the normative model
    Category C – Relating (RQ1, 2, 3)
    • Interpersonal interactions and communicative styles
    • Dimensions
    • Regulating
    • Bringing to the representation
    • Collaboration (style, force, purpose)
  • Shaping and Framing categories
    Category A – Conducting (RQ1)
    Category D – Shaping (RQ1, 4)
    Category B – Planning (RQ1, 3)
    Category E – Framing (RQ1, 3)
    Category C – Relating (RQ1, 2, 3)
  • Comparative method
    Using Compendium to rank order the sessions along eachqualitative dimension and capture rationale
    (http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/selvin/analysis)
  • Comparative method
    AG4
    Using Compendium to rank order the sessions along eachqualitative dimension and capture rationale
    (http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/selvin/analysis)
  • Shaping rankings and ratings
  • Granularity of pre-created structure
    RST
    RG2
    44
  • Intervention to get participants to look at the representation
    RG2
    45
  • Intervention to get participants to look at the representation
    AG4
  • Visual/spatial refinement
    AG3
    AG4
    47
    AG4
  • Hypertextual refinement
    RG2
    Hab
    48
  • 49
    It is now possible to compare sessions along the experiential dimensions
    Larger plot = generally higher rankings
    Shaping and framing dimensions
  • 50
    Practitioner skills and experience
  • 51
    It is now possible to compare sessions along the experiential dimensions
    Larger plot = generally higher rankings
    Shaping and framing dimensions
  • 52
    Facilitation skills were a stronger predictor than technical skills
  • Generalization to other genres of participatory representations
    Informal whiteboarding
    Graphic facilitation
  • 54
    Contributions
    • Offers analytical tools
  • Contributions
    • Offers analytical tools
    • Provides a language to characterize and compare instances of representational practice
  • Contributions
    • Offers analytical tools
    • Provides a language to characterize and compare instances of representational practice
    • Describes the types of sensemaking moments that practitioners encounter
  • 57
    Contributions
    • Offers analytical tools
    • Provides a language to characterize and compare instances of representational practice
    • Describes the types of sensemaking moments that practitioners encounter
    • Highlights the specific role of a hypermedia technology
  • 58
    Contributions
    • Offers analytical tools
    • Provides a language to characterize and compare instances of representational practice
    • Describes the types of sensemaking moments that practitioners encounter
    • Highlights the specific role of a hypermedia technology
    • Contributes to reflective methods for practitioner and practice development
  • 59
    Future work
    • Studies
    • Performing longitudinal studies and action research with emphasis on artifactual sensemaking
    • Comparing other practices
    • Tools and methods
    • Developing the analytical tools
    • Developing training, assessment, and reflective practice methodologies
    • Theory
    • Exploring the “recursive” nature of the experiential dimensions as they relate to representational practices (as something you apply vs. something you live within)
  • 60
    For more
    • Analysis artifacts http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/selvin/analysis/
    • Research blog http://knowledgeart.blogspot.com
    • Recent journal articlehttp://oro.open.ac.uk/20948/1/Selvin-HumanTechnology2010.pdf