Digital Art Making as a Representational Process

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 121-162

  Halverson, Erica Rosenfeld ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876147860     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2011.639471     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Azevedo, F. 2000. Designing representations of terrain: A study in meta-representational competence. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19: 443-480.
2. Calabrese Barton, A. and Tan, E. 2010. We be burnin! Agency, identity, and science learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19: 187-229.
3. Catterall, J. 2006. Inside Out's school project: A research report measuring the power of a theatre-based program for at-risk junior high students. Teaching Theatre, 17(2): 3-8.
4. Catterall, J. and Deasy, R. 2002. Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development, Washington, DC: National Education Association, The Arts Education Partnership.
5. Corbin, J. M. and Strauss, A. L. 2008. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Cox, R. 1999. Representation construction, externalized cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9: 343-363.
7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1996. Creativity, New York, NY: HarperCollins.
8. diSessa, A. 2004. Metarepresentational competence: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22: 293-331.
9. Eisner, E. 2002. The arts and the creation of mind, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10. Enyedy, N. 2005. Inventing mapping: Creating cultural forms to solve collective problems. Cognition and Instruction, 23: 427-466.
11. Fleming, M. 2010. Arts in education and creativity: A literature review, New Castle Upon Tyne, England: Arts Council England.
12. Gardner, H. 1973. The arts and human development, New York, NY: HarperCollins.
13. Gardner, H. 1982. Art, mind, and brain: A cognitive approach to creativity, New York, NY: Basic Books.
14. Gee, J. P. 2003. What videogames can teach us about language and literacy, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
15. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, Chicago, IL: Aldine.
16. Halverson, E. R. 2007. "Listening to voices of queer youth: The dramaturgical process as identity exploration". In New directions in literacy research for teaching, learning and political action, Edited by: Blackburn, M. V. and Clark, C. 153-176. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
17. Halverson, E. R. 2008. From one woman to everyman: The reportability paradox in publicly performed narratives. Narrative Inquiry, 18(1): 29-52.
18. Halverson, E. R. 2010. Film as identity exploration: A multimodal analysis of youth-produced films. Teachers College Record, 112: 2352-2378.
19. Halverson, E. R., Lowenhaupt, R., Gibbons, D. and Bass, M. 2009. Conceptualizing identity in youth media arts organizations: A comparative case study. E-Learning, 6(1): 23-42.
20. Hasirci, D. and Demirkan, H. 2007. Understanding the effects of cognition in creative decision making: A creativity model for enhancing the design studio process. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3): 259-271.
21. Hayes, J. R. 1989. "Cognitive processes in creativity". In Handbook of creativity, Edited by: Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R. and Reynolds, C. R. 135-145. New York, NY: Plenum.
22. Heath, S. B. 1993. Inner-city life through drama: Imagining the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27(2): 177-192.
23. Heath, S. B. 2000. Seeing our way into learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(1): 121-132.
24. Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S. and Sheridan, K. M. 2007. Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education, New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
25. Hull, G. A. and Katz, M. 2006. Crafting an agentive self: Case studies of digital storytelling. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(1): 43-81.
26. Hull, G. A. and Nelson, M. E. 2005. Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22(2): 224-261.
27. Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the wild, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittani, M., boyd, d, Cody, R., Herr-Stephenson, B.,... and Tripp, L. 2010. Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M., & Robison, A. (2007). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Building the field of digital media and learning. Retrieved from http://newmedialiteracies.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf (http://newmedialiteracies.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf)
30. Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. 2003. New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning, Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
31. Lehrer, R. and Pritchard, C. 2002. "Symbolizing space into being". In Symbolization, modeling and tool use in mathematics education, Edited by: Gravemeijer, K., Lehrer, R., van Oers, B. and Verschaffel, L. 59-86. Dordrecht, The, Netherlands: Kluwer.
32. Lehrer, R. and Schauble, L. 2000. Inventing data structures for representational purposes: Elementary grade students' classification models. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2: 49-72.
33. Lehrer, R. and Schauble, L. 2003. "Symbolic communication in mathematics and science: Co-constituting inscription and thought". In Language, literacy, and cognitive development: The development and consequences of symbolic communication, Edited by: Byrnes, J. and Amsel, L. D. 167-192. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Magnifico, A. 2010. Writing for whom? Cognition, motivation, and a writer's audience. Educational Psychologist, 45(3): 167-184.
35. McLaughlin, M. W., Irby, M. A. and Langman, J. 1994. Urban sanctuaries: Neighborhood organizations in the lives and futures of inner-city youth, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
36. Miles, M. B. and Huberman, M. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Nelson, M. E., Hull, G. and Roche-Smith, J. 2008. Challenges of multimedia self-presentation: Taking, and mistaking, the show on the road. Written Communication, 25(4): 415-440.
38. New London Group. 1996. A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1): 60-92.
39. Norman, D. 1983. "Some observations on mental models". In Mental models (pp. 7-14), Edited by: Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Norman, D. 1993. Things that make us smart, New York, NY: Doubleday.
41. Puntambekar, S. and Goldstein, J. 2007. Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16: 429-459.
42. Reisberg, D. 1987. "External representations and the advantages of externalizing one's thoughts". In The Ninth Annual Cognitive Science Society, 281-293. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Salomon, G. 1993. Distributed cognitions, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
44. Sefton-Green, J. 2000a. "From creativity to cultural production: Shared perspectives". In Evaluating creativity: Making and learning by young people, Edited by: Sefton-Green, J. and Sinker, R. 216-231. London, England: Routledge.
45. Sefton-Green, J. 2000b. "Introduction: Evaluating creativity". In Evaluating creativity: Making and learning by young people, Edited by: Sefton-Green, J. and Sinker, R. 1-15. London, England: Routledge.
46. Sefton-Green, J. and Sinker, R. 2000. Evaluating creativity: Making and learning by young people, London, England: Routledge.
47. Sheridan, K. 2011. Envision and observe: Using the studio thinking framework for learning and teaching in digital arts. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(1): 19-26.
48. Sheridan, K. and Gardner, H. in press. "Artistic development: Three essential spheres". In Aesthetic science: Connecting minds, brains, and experience, Edited by: Shimamura, A. and Palmer, S. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
49. Soep, E. 2006. Critique: Assessment and the production of learning. Teachers College Record, 108: 748-777.
50. Spillane, J., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J. 2001. Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3): 23-28.
51. Stake, R. 2000. "Case studies". In Handbook of qualitative research, Edited by: Denzin, N. K. and Guba, Y. S. 435-454. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52. Wiley, L. and Feiner, D. 2001. "Making a scene: Representational authority and a community-centered process of script development". In Performing democracy: International perspectives on urban community-based performance, Edited by: Haedicke, S. C. and Nellhaus, T. 121-142. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
53. Worthman, C. 2002. "Just playing the part": Engaging adolescents in drama and literacy, New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
54. Yokochi, S. and Okada, T. 2005. Creative cognitive process of art making: A field study of a traditional Chinese ink painter. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2-3): 241-255.
55. Zhang, J. and Norman, D. 1994. Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18: 87-122.