New Visuality in Art/Science: A Pedagogy of Connection for Cognitive Growth and Creativity

References

• Akkerman, S. F. (2011). Learning at boundaries. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 21–25. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.005.
   Google Scholar
• Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169. doi:10.3102/0034654311404435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambrosio, C. (2014). Iconic representations and representative practices. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 28(3), 255–275. doi:10.1080/02698595.2014.959831.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbousas, J. (2014). Visual arts education and the formation of literacies: An exploration of visuality. In G. Barton (Ed.), Literacy in the arts (pp. 39–54). Cham, New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee, A., & Vartanian, O. (2014). Neuroaesthetics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 370–375. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.), (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Daston, L. (2008). On scientific observation. ISIS: Journal of the History of Science in Society, 99(1), 97–110. doi: 10.1086/587535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daston, L. (2014). Beyond representation. In C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, & M. E. Lynch (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice revisited (pp. 319–322). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Cambridge, MA: Zone Books.
   Google Scholar
• Deakin-Crick, R., & Grushka, K. (2009). Signs, symbols and metaphor: Linking self with text in inquiry-based learning. The Curriculum Journal, 20(4), 447–464. doi:10.1080/09585170903425069.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London, England: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, A. (2007). Interrelated and interdependent. Developmental Science, 10(1), 152–158. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00578.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond, A. (2009). The interplay of biology and the environment broadly defined. Developmental Psychology, 45(1), 1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz, G., & McKenna, M. (2017). Preparing educators for arts integration. Placing creativity at the centre of learning. Victoria, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education. Originally Published by Teachers College, Columbia University.
   Google Scholar
• Dillon, P. (2006). Creativity, integrativism and a pedagogy of connection. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 69–83. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2006.08.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon, P. (2008). A pedagogy of connection and boundary crossings: Methodological and epistemological transactions in working across and between disciplines. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 255–262. doi:10.1080/14703290802176121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinham, J., Grushka, K., MacCallum, J., Pascoe, R., Wright, P., & Brown, N. C. M. (2007). Visual education—Repositioning visual arts and design: Educating for expression and participation in an increasingly visually mediated world. International Journal of Learning, 14(6), 77–85. Retrieved from http://www.Learning-Journal.com.
   Google Scholar
• Dolcos, F., Katsumi, Y., Denkova, E., Weymar, M., & Dolcos, S. (2017). Current Issues and Emerging Directions in the Impact of Emotion on Memory: A Review of Evidence from Brain Imaging Investigations. In T. Tsukiura & S. Umeda (Eds.), Memory in a Social Context: Brain, Mind, and Society (pp. 57–101). Tokyo, Japan: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grushka, K. (2010). Conceptualising visual learning as an embodied and performative pedagogy for all classrooms. Encounters on Education, 11, 13–23.
   Google Scholar
• Grushka, K., & Donnelly, D. (2010). Digital technologies & performative pedagogies: Repositioning the visual. Digital Culture and Education (DCE), 2(1), 83–102. Retrieved from http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/dec1030_donnelly_2010.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Grushka, K., Donnelly, D., & Clement, N. (2014). Digital culture and neuroscience: A conversation with learning and curriculum. Digital Culture & Education, 6(4), 334–350. Retrieved from http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/
   Google Scholar
• Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. M. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of arts education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jappy, T. (2013). Introduction to Peircean visual semiotics. London, England: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Jay, M. (1996). Vision in context: Reflections and refractions. In T. Brennan & M. Jay (Eds.), Vision in context: Historical and contemporary perspectives on sight (pp. 1–12). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, C. A., & Galison, P. (2014). Picturing science, producing art. Abingdon, Oxon, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Knauff, M. (2013). Space to reason: A spatial theory of human thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koenig, I. (2015). Art curriculum in partnership with Canadian physics lab. Leonardo, 48(5), 472–473. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_01069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolijn, E. (2013). Observation and visualization: Reflections on the relationship between science, visual arts, and the evolution of the scientific image. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 104(4), 597–608. doi:10.1007/s10482-013-9951-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozhevnikov, M. (2015). Visual-Object Versus Visual-Spatial Representations: Insights from Studying Visualization in Artists and Scientists Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, J. (2012). Constituting aesthetics and utility: Copyright, patent and the purification of knowledge objects in an art and science collaboration. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 2(1), 247–268. doi:10.14318/hau2.1.012.
   Google Scholar
• McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muscovitz, J. (2013). The Third Teacher: from classrooms to learning ecologies Pt 1. Education Today ( Term 1), 4–7. Retrieved from http://www.educationtoday.com.au.
   Google Scholar
• Nöth, W. (2011). 16 visual semiotics: Key features and an application to picture ads. In J. Margolis & L. Paulwels (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 298–317). London, England: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwels, L. (2005a). A theoretical framework for assessing visual representational practices in knowledge building and science communications. In L. Pauwels (Ed.), Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building & science communication (pp. 1–25). Hanvoer: University Press of New England.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwels, L. (2005b). Introduction: The role of visual representation in the production of scientific reality. In L. Pauwels (Ed.), Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building & science communication (pp. vii–xix). Hanover: University Press of New England.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwels, L. (2006). Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication: UPNE.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwels, L. (2005). Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication. New England: Dartmouth College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pauwels, L. (2005). Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication. New England: Dartmouth College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phelps, E. (2006). Emotion and cognition: Insights from studies of the human amygdala. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 27–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelps, E. A. (2009). Emotional influences on memory and attention. In L. R. S. Squire (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Neuroscience (pp. 941–946). Oxford: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2013). Learning through the affordances of representation construction. In R. Tytler, V. Prain, P. Hubber, & B. Waldrip (Eds.), Constructing representations to learn in science (pp. 67–82). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: SensePublishers.
   Google Scholar
• Root-Bernstein, B., Siler, T., Brown, A., & Snelson, K. (2011). ArtScience: Integrative collaboration to create a sustainable future. Leonardo, 44(3), 192–192. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_01058.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semetsky, I. (2009). Deleuze as philosopher of education: Affective knowledge/effective learning. The European Legacy: Towards New Paradigms, 14(4), 443–456. doi:10.1080/10848770902999534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spector, J. M. (2015). Education, training competencies, curriculum and technology. In X. Ge, D. Ifenthaler, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Emerging technologies for STEAM education: Full steam ahead (pp. 3–14). New York, NY: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Stafford, B. M. (2007). Echo objects: The cognitive work of images. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stafford, B. M. (2011). Introduction: Crystal and smoke: Putting the image back in mind. In B. M. Stafford (Eds.), A field guide to a new meta-field: Bridging the humanities-neurosciences divide (pp. x, 354 p.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sũzcs, D., & Goswami, U. (2007). Educational neuroscience: Defining a new discipline for the study of mental representations. Mind Brain Education, 1(3), 114–127. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00012.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, J. A., Larkin, M., & Flowers, P. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, B. (2015). The cognitive design of tools of thought. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(1), 99–116. doi:10.1007/s13164-014-0214-.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis, J. (2013). The impact of creativity on the brain. Retrieved from http://www.teachthought.com/learning/the-impact-of-creativity-on-the-brain/
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, B. (2014). Science and sensibility. In B. Wilson, B. Hawkins, & S. Sim (Eds.), Art, science, and cultural understanding. Champaign, IL: Common Ground.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, B., Hawkins, B., & Sim, S. (2015). Art, science and communities of practice. Leonardo, 48(2), 152–157. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_00972.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeki, S. (1999). Inner vision: An exploration of art and the brain. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zeki, S. (2001). Artistic creativity and the brain. Science, 293(5527), 51–52. doi:10.1126/science.1062331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeki, S. (2014). Neurobiology and the humanities. Neuron, 84(1), 12–14. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.09.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar