(continued from previous post)
(1, 2 and 2, 12) Gunther Kress gave two presentations that called on much of the same data and examples, "Reading Images: abstract v. concrete representations" and "Multimodality: representation and new media." Good visual examples provided solid structure here, but would not be properly represented in this forum. One of the very elegant examples he used was to analyze the role of cultural traditions in the Chinese written language and their effect on cognition and role in communication. Specifically he looked at the very rigid conventions for forming Chinese characters and the dynamic inter-relationship with the Chinese culture, as well as the factthat the need to center those characters influence communication standards in print advertising. He also reinforced the widely accepted focus on human and social needs being the appropriate driver for designing information.
(1, 5) Elizabeth Sanders presented "Participatory Designing: information and adaptation." A systematic look at the evolution from a passive to participatory paradigm, Elizabeth sliced the progression from doing -> adapting -> making -> creating in a variety of ways, building to the thesis of adoptive design, attributed to Tom Moran. While there is definitely a movement toward more individualized and adaptive/adoptive design, I wonder if adoptive design will prove to be culturally viable as it will make experience overly individualistic and minimize the "shared culture" that we experience through consumption of mass cultural artifacts. While adoptive design certainly has some role there are valid cultural reasons that the paradigm will not shift completely.
(1,9) Karel van der Warde presented "Producers, Regulators and Users: balancing conflicting demands in medical information." This was a very sobering presentation, calling attention to the awful Information Design with regard to medical-related labelling and information space - including examples that resulted in patient death and devastating mis-treatment. Karel's passion for the subject came through in the content, use of humor and his physical presentation, to include a plea for substantive change in the relationship between the health care system and legal considerations. His four basic criteria for what medical information should be - valid, reliable, accurate and trustworthy - is good basic criteria for any situation where people are relying on good information for their basic well being.
(1, 11) Rune Pettersson was scheduled to present "Gearing Communication to the Cognitive Needs of Receivers: findings from visual literacy research" but did not end up attending the conference. A copy of his paper was available and he was grouped into this category.
It was an excellent collection of presentations, perhaps not pulling together to make a tightly wound unified whole, but covering a number of interesting elements pertaining to knowledge presentation. In total, both conferences and all four days, an excellent experience!
(1, 2 and 2, 12) Gunther Kress gave two presentations that called on much of the same data and examples, "Reading Images: abstract v. concrete representations" and "Multimodality: representation and new media." Good visual examples provided solid structure here, but would not be properly represented in this forum. One of the very elegant examples he used was to analyze the role of cultural traditions in the Chinese written language and their effect on cognition and role in communication. Specifically he looked at the very rigid conventions for forming Chinese characters and the dynamic inter-relationship with the Chinese culture, as well as the factthat the need to center those characters influence communication standards in print advertising. He also reinforced the widely accepted focus on human and social needs being the appropriate driver for designing information.
(1, 5) Elizabeth Sanders presented "Participatory Designing: information and adaptation." A systematic look at the evolution from a passive to participatory paradigm, Elizabeth sliced the progression from doing -> adapting -> making -> creating in a variety of ways, building to the thesis of adoptive design, attributed to Tom Moran. While there is definitely a movement toward more individualized and adaptive/adoptive design, I wonder if adoptive design will prove to be culturally viable as it will make experience overly individualistic and minimize the "shared culture" that we experience through consumption of mass cultural artifacts. While adoptive design certainly has some role there are valid cultural reasons that the paradigm will not shift completely.
(1,9) Karel van der Warde presented "Producers, Regulators and Users: balancing conflicting demands in medical information." This was a very sobering presentation, calling attention to the awful Information Design with regard to medical-related labelling and information space - including examples that resulted in patient death and devastating mis-treatment. Karel's passion for the subject came through in the content, use of humor and his physical presentation, to include a plea for substantive change in the relationship between the health care system and legal considerations. His four basic criteria for what medical information should be - valid, reliable, accurate and trustworthy - is good basic criteria for any situation where people are relying on good information for their basic well being.
(1, 11) Rune Pettersson was scheduled to present "Gearing Communication to the Cognitive Needs of Receivers: findings from visual literacy research" but did not end up attending the conference. A copy of his paper was available and he was grouped into this category.
It was an excellent collection of presentations, perhaps not pulling together to make a tightly wound unified whole, but covering a number of interesting elements pertaining to knowledge presentation. In total, both conferences and all four days, an excellent experience!