Actions

(Inter (Trans) discipline)

Conversation and Critique                  developing collaborative reviews accepting that evaluation is temporal

Consistent communication                 Transparency in research and practice

Openness/ Shifts in thinking             Developing crisis into the practice

Project driven agendas                       conditions/context/idea

Variables

Time, pace, space, context

Core

Evaluation, re-evaluation, non-hierarchical engagement process, allow discussion and critique.

Learning approaches first need to consider its placement and environment, is it appropriate in public or private spaces , is a common or civic sphere needed and if so how is it created. This research element will devise how digital public space can be claimed as a common space to produce agency, discursive discussion and collaboration. The common is the shared history of displacement, the development of a digital commons can be seen as the production of an ongoing architectural structure.

Peer Lead discussion groups?

Evaluation as a stage in the process not the end point this allows for it to consistently evolve. To conclude is to continue.

Agency of engagements <> Value <> Reflection <> Conditions 

Audience’s Agency?

How directed is or should be the audiences engagement with their environment, what dictates the engagement process, space/place/theme/order?

How to create space for something to happen or not happen?

At any point it is important to accept failure as equal to or in some case greater than success.

Initial questions

How important is the notion of play?

What are the conditions (or context) for learning?

What is the value in content?

Public/private/common?

What levels of democratised participation does the projects endeavor to achieve?

Face to face exchange?

How do values manifest in learning experiences?

The bearings of space on your work, what could you do digitally that you can not do physically?