Using artificial intelligence in craft education: crafting with text-to-image generative models

References

• Audry, S. 2021. Art in the Age of Machine Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bommasani, R., D. A. Hudson, E. Adeli, R. Altman, S. Arora, S. von Arx, M. S. Bernstein, et al. 2021. On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models. arXiv:2108.07258 [cs.LG]. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2108.07258
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, G. C., and S. L. Star. 2000. Sorting Things out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson, E., and A. McAfee. 2014. The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Caramiaux, B., and S. Fdili Alaoui. 2022. ““Explorers of Unknown Planets” Practices and Politics of Artificial Intelligence in Visual Arts.” Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW2), 1-24.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, K. 2021. Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darwiche, A. 2018. “Human-level Intelligence or Animal-Like Abilities?” Communications of the ACM 61 (10): 56–67. doi:10.1145/3271625.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhariwal, P., and A. Nichol. 2021. “Diffusion Models Beat GANs on Image Synthesis.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: 8780–8794. doi:10.1145/3271625.
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, C., and M. Stacey. 2000. “Sources of Inspiration: A Language of Design.” Design Studies 21: 5. doi:10.1016/S0142-694X(99)00003-4.
   Google Scholar
• Eisentraut, R., and J. Günther. 1997. “Individual Styles of Problem Solving and Their Relation to Representations in the Design Process.” Design Studies 18: 4. doi:10.1016/S0142-694X(97)00007-0.
   Google Scholar
• Fiebrink, R. 2019. “Machine Learning Education for Artists, Musicians, and Other Creative Practitioners.” ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 19 (4): 1–32. doi:10.1145/3294008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finnish National Board of Education. 2014. National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Gero, K. I., and L. B. Chilton. 2019. “Metaphoria: An Algorithmic Companion for Metaphor Creation.” Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12. doi:10.1145/3290605.3300526.
   Google Scholar
• Ghosh, A., R. Zhang, P. K. Dokania, O. Wang, A. A. Efros, P. H. S. Torr, and E. Shechtman. 2019. Interactive Sketch and Fill: Multiclass Sketch-to-Image Translation. ArXiv:1909.11081.
   Google Scholar
• Goel, V. 1995. Sketches of Thought. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Groth, C. 2017. "Making Sense Through Hands: Design and Craft Practice Analysed as Embodied Cognition." Aalto University Doctoral Dissertations. Aalto ARTS Books: Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Gwern. 2020. GPT-3 Creative Fiction. https://www.Gwern.Net/GPT-3.
   Google Scholar
• Hammer, D., and L. K. Berland. 2014. “Confusing Claims for Data: A Critique of Common Practices for Presenting Qualitative Research on Learning.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 23 (1): 37–46. doi:10.1080/10508406.2013.802652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Härkki, T. 2018. “Handling Knowledge: Three Perspectives on Embodied Creation of Knowledge in Collaborative Design.” Ph.D. thesis, Helsinki Studies in Education, 31, Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Härkki, T., P. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, and K. Hakkarainen. 2016. “Material Knowledge in Collaborative Designing and Making: A Case of Wearable sea Creatures.” FORMAkademisk 9 (1): 1–21. doi:10.7577/formakademisk.1480.
   Google Scholar
• Heikkilä, M. 2022. “This Artist is Dominating AI-Generated Art. And he’s not Happy about it.” MIT Tech Review, September 16, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Hendricks, V. F., and M. Vestergaard. 2018. “Reality Lost: Markets of Attention, Misinformation and Manipulation.” Reality Lost: Markets of Attention, Misinformation and Manipulation, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00813-0.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., and P. Murphy. 1999. “The Potential for Collaborative Problem Solving in Design and Technology.” International Journal of Technology and Design Education 9 (1): 1–36. doi:10.1023/A:1008855526312.
   Google Scholar
• Hintz, A., L. Dencik, and K. Wahl-Jorgensen. 2019. Digital Citizenship in a Datafied Society. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, W., M. Bialik, and C. Fadel. 2019. “Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign, Boston, MA.” USA.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, C.-Z. A., H. V. Koops, E. Newton-Rex, M. Dinculescu, and C. J. Cai. 2020. AI Song Contest: Human-AI Co-Creation in Songwriting. ArXiv:2010.05388.
   Google Scholar
• Huotilainen, M., M. Rankanen, C. Groth, P. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, and M. Mäkelä. 2018. “Why our Brains Love Arts and Crafts Implications of Creative Practices on Psychophysical Well-Being.” FormAkademisk 11: 2. doi:10.7577/formakademisk.1908.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., and S.-H. Kim. 2009. “Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.” Minerva 47 (2): 119–146. doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, A. I., G. J. Pasman, and P. J. Stappers. 2006. “Collections Designers Keep: Collecting Visual Material for Inspiration and Reference.” CoDesign 2: 1. doi:10.1080/15710880600571123.
   Google Scholar
• Keyes, O. 2018. The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Implications of Automatic Gender Recognition. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2(CSCW). doi:10.1145/3274357
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, A. D. I., J. E. Guillory, and J. T. Hancock. 2014. “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion Through Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111 (24): 8788–8790. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320040111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levendowski, A. 2018. “How Copyright law Can fix Artificial Intelligence’s Implicit Bias Problem.” Washington Law Review 93 (2): 579–630.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, V., and Chilton, L. B. 2022. Design Guidelines for Prompt Engineering Text-to-Image Generative Models. Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi:10.1145/3491102.3501825
   Google Scholar
• Long, D., and Magerko, B. 2020. What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ‘20, pages 1–16, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Lupton, D. 2020. “The Internet of Things: Social Dimensions.” Sociology Compass 14: 4. doi:10.1111/soc4.12770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupton, D., and A. Watson. 2022. “Research-Creations for Speculating About Digitized Automation: Bringing Creative Writing Prompts and Vital Materialism Into the Sociology of Futures.” Qualitative Inquiry 28 (7): 754–766. doi:10.1177/10778004221097049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques, L. S., Gresse von Wangenheim, C. Hauck, and J. C. R. 2020. “Teaching Machine Learning in School: A Systematic Mapping of the State of the art.” Informatics in Education 19 (2): 283–321. doi:10.15388/infedu.2020.14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez, S., and G. Stager. 2016. Invent to Learn: Making, Tinkering and Engineering in the Classroom. In 2016 Edi. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mathias, D., C. Snider, B. Hicks, and C. Ranscombe. 2019. “Accelerating Product Prototyping Through Hybrid Methods: Coupling 3D Printing and LEGO.” Design Studies 62. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2019.04.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGeehan, S. 2022. Prompter Notebook for MidJourney. https://Docs.Google.Com/Document/d/1B725Hc7J17gxEFOLEA6H_0PDKwQOWZ0HkTqH9RwU9Ks/Edit.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, S. U. 2018. Algorithms of Oppression. New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Omwami, A., H. Lahti, and P. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen. 2020. “The Variation of the Idea Development Process in Apparel Design: A Multiple Case Study.” International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education 13 (3), doi:10.1080/17543266.2020.1817573.
   Google Scholar
• Oppenlaender, J. 2022. “The Creativity of Text-Based Generative Art” ArXiv:2206.02904.
   Google Scholar
• Patel, K. 2008. "Thinkers in the Kitchen: Embodied Thinking and Learning in Practice." Ann Arbour (MI): UMI dissertation services ProQuest.
   Google Scholar
• Paullada, A., I. D. Raji, E. M. Bender, E. Denton, and A. Hanna. 2021. “Data and its (dis)Contents: A Survey of Dataset Development and use in Machine Learning Research.” Patterns 2 (11): 100336. doi:10.1016/j.patter.2021.100336.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pei, E., I. Campbell, and M. Evans. 2011. “A Taxonomic Classification of Visual Design Representations Used by Industrial Designers and Engineering Designers.” The Design Journal 14 (1): 64–91. doi:10.2752/175630610X12877385838803.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petre, M., H. Sharp, and J. Johnson. 2006. “Complexity Through Combination: An Account of Knitwear Design.” Design Studies 27: 2. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2005.07.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polanyi, M. 1966. “The Tacit Dimension.” In Knowledge in Organisations. The University of Chicago Press. doi:10.1353/ppp.2002.0018.
   Google Scholar
• Pöllänen, S. 2009. “Contextualising Craft: Pedagogical Models for Craft Education.” International Journal of Art and Design Education 28: 3. doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2009.01619.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnick, M., and B. Silverman. 2005. “Some Reflections on Designing Construction Kits for Kids.” Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 117–122. doi:10.1145/1109540.1109556.
   Google Scholar
• Rezwana, J., and M. Lou Maher. 2022. “Designing Creative AI Partners with COFI: A Framework for Modeling Interaction in Human-AI Co-Creative Systems.” ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact, doi:10.1145/3519026.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, S. J., and P. Norvig. 2022. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. 4th ed. Essex, UK: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Saharia, C., W. Chan, S. Saxena, L. Li, J. Whang, E. Denton, S. K. S. Ghasemipour, et al. 2022. Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understanding. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2205.11487.
   Google Scholar
• Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., and K. Hakkarainen. 2000. “Visualization and Sketching in the Design Process.” The Design Journal 3 (1): 3–14. doi:10.2752/146069200789393544.
   Google Scholar
• Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., and K. Kangas. 2013. “Craft Education: Authentic Design Constraints, Embodied Thinking, and Craft Making.” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, edited by J. B. Reitan, P. Lloyd, E. Bohemia, L. M. Nielsen, I. Digranes, and E. Lutnæs, 1369–1383. ABM-media.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1969. “The Sciences of the Artificial.” The American Journal of Psychology 83 (Issue 1), doi:10.2307/1420867.
   Google Scholar
• Stoimenova, N., and R. Price. 2020. “Exploring the Nuances of Designing (with/for) Artificial Intelligence.” ArXiv, doi:10.1162/desi_a_00613.
   Google Scholar
• Tedre, M., T. Toivonen, J. Kahila, H. Vartiainen, T. Valtonen, I. Jormanainen, and A. Pears. 2021. “Teaching Machine Learning in K-12 Classroom: Pedagogical and Technological Trajectories for Artificial Intelligence Education.” IEEE Access 9: 110558–110572. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3097962.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TENK. 2019. The Ethical Principles of Research with Human Participants and Ethical Review in the Human Sciences in Finland Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK guidelines 2019. https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2021-01/Ethical_review_in_human_sciences_2020.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Valtonen, T., M. Tedre, K. Mäkitalo, and H. Vartiainen. 2019. “Media Literacy Education in the Age of Machine Learning.” Journal of Media Literacy Education 11: 2. doi:10.23860/JMLE-2019-11-2-2.
   Google Scholar
• Vartiainen, H., L. Pellas, J. Kahila, T. Valtonen, and M. Tedre. 2022. “Pre-service Teachers’ Insights on Data Agency.” New Media & Society. doi:10.1177/14614448221079626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vartiainen, H., M. Tedre, A. Salonen, and T. Valtonen. 2020. “Rematerialization of the Virtual and its Challenges for Design and Technology Education.” Techne Series 27 (1): 52–69.
   Google Scholar
• Vartiainen, H., T. Toivonen, I. Jormanainen, J. Kahila, M. Tedre, and T. Valtonen. 2021. “Machine Learning for Middle Schoolers: Learning Through Data-Driven Design.” International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 29. doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100281.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhou, X., Van Brummelen, J., and Lin, P. 2020. Designing AI Learning Experiences for K–12: Emerging Works, Future Opportunities and a Design Framework. arXiv:2009.10228 [cs.CY]. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2009.10228
   Google Scholar
• Zuboff, S. 2015. “Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization.” Journal of Information Technology 30 (1): 75–89. doi:10.1057/jit.2015.5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar