skip to main content
10.1145/3513130.3558990acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Data as “Brickolage”: Teaching Material Data Visualization Design with LEGO

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 October 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Data visualization is a reliable tool for professional communication practitioners for synthesizing and presenting data to a variety of audiences and attention should be given to preparing and teaching our students how to design effective visualizations. In this experience report, the author presents finding from teaching a data visualization activity using LEGO blocks and Indigenous maker practices. Students can then transfer such skills to making and critiquing their own data visualizations following this foray into material practices involving manipulating and playing with data through the activity. The use of hands-on making, alongside the study of good data visualization design, helps to instill maker practices of community and creativity in students as evidenced in the full visualization projects produced by students.

References

  1. Madeleine Sorapure. 2019. “Text, image, data, interaction: Understanding information visualization,” Computers and Composition, vol. 54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Jordan Frith, ed. 2021. Special issue: Business and Technical Communication and COVID-19: Communicating in Times of Crisis. JBTC Vol 35, issue 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Sonia H. Stephens, Denise E. DeLorme, and Scott C. Hagen. 2014. An analysis of the narrative-building features of interactive sea level rise viewers, Science Communication, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 675–705.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Daniel P. Richards. 2019. An ethic of constraint: Citizens, sea-level rise viewers, and the limits of agency, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 292–337.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Rachel Atherton. 2021. “Missing/Unspecified”: Demographic data visualization during the COVID-19 pandemic. JBTC Vol 35, issue 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Sara Doan. 2021. Misrepresenting COVID-19: Lying with charts during the second golden age of data design. JBTC Vol 35, issue 1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Angela Haas. 2007. Wampum as hypertext: An American Indian intellectual tradition of multimedia theory and practice. Studies in American Indian Literatures, 19(4), 77–100. DOI: 10.1353/AIL.2008.0005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Krystin Gollihue and Mai Nou Xiong-Gum. 2020. Dataweaving: Textiles as data materialization. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy 25(1). Retrieved from: http:/​/​kairos.technorhetoric.net/​25.1/​disputatio/​gollihue-xiong-gum/​theory.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Qwo-Li Driskill. 2015. Decolonial skillshares: Indigenous rhetorics as radical practice. In Lisa King, Rose Gubele, & Joyce R. Anderson (Eds.), Survivance, sovereignty, and story: Teaching American Indian rhetorics, pp. 57-78. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Qwo-Li Driskill, Angela Haas, and Emily Legg. 2016. Woven memory: Cherokee double-wall baskets. Workshop presented at the 2016 Cultural Rhetorics Conference in Lansing, MI..Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Edward Tufte. 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire, CT, USA: Graph. Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sam Dragga and Dan Voss. 2001. Cruel pies: The inhumanity of technical illustrations. Technical Communication, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 265–274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Adam Strantz. 2021. Using Web Standards to Design Accessible Data Visualizations in Professional Communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. DOI: 10.1109/TPC.2021.3091784Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Charles Kostelnick. 2008. The visual rhetoric of data displays: The conundrum of clarity. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol 51, no. 1, pp. 116 – 130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Claude Lévi-Strauss. 1966. The Savage Mind. Chicago, IL: Univ. Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Nancy W. Coppola and Norbert Elliot. 2005. Big Science or Bricolage: An Alternative Model for Research in Technical Communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, Vol 48, no 3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Rawgraphs. 2022. Retrieved from: https: // https://www.rawgraphs.io/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Data as “Brickolage”: Teaching Material Data Visualization Design with LEGO

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          SIGDOC '22: Proceedings of the 40th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication
          October 2022
          187 pages
          ISBN:9781450392464
          DOI:10.1145/3513130

          Copyright © 2022 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 6 October 2022

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format