Advertisement

“In-Betweens Spaces”

Tales from a Remida
  • Nina Odegard
  • Nina Rossholt
Chapter
  • 396 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter draws on a Doctoral work1 aiming at exploring the possibilities and potentials in children’s encounters with reusable materials, different analogue and digital tools. The chapter also explores the agency of reusable materials, where we argue that it offers different perspectives in terms of children’s aesthetic explorations.

Keywords

Early Childhood Education Recycle Material Empirical Matter Sense Publisher Norwegian Kindergarten 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2008). Posthumanist permformativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. In S. Alaimo & S. J. Hekman (Eds.), Material feminisms (pp. 120–157). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dahlberg, G., & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dolphijn, R., & Van der Tuin, I. (2012). New materialism: Interviews and carthographies. Ann Arbor, MI: Open Humanity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fredriksen, B. C. (2013). Begripe med kroppen Barns erfaringer som grunnlag for all læring. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  8. Girak, S. (2015). Forget me not: An exhibition; and, creative reuse: How rescued materials transformed my a/r/tographic practice: An exegesis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation/Master’s thesis). Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia.Google Scholar
  9. Guerra, M., & Zuccoli, F. (2012). Finished and unfinished objects: Supporting children’s creativity through materials. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 721–727.Google Scholar
  10. Guerra, M., & Zuccoli, F. (2014). Unusual materials in pre and primary schools: Presence and actions. Procedia : Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1988–1992. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.508Google Scholar
  11. Haraway, D. (2007). When species meet. Posthumanities (Vol. 3). Minniapolis, MN: University of Minnosota press.Google Scholar
  12. Harris, J. (2005). The ordering of things: Organization in Bruno Latour. The Sociological Review, 53, (s.1), 163–177.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, L. (in press). A practice in materialized refiguration: A modest attempt in making a difference. In A. B. Reinertsen (Ed.), Becoming Earth: A post-humanism turn in educational discourse collapsing the nature –culture divide. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Kaufmann, J. (2011). Poststructural analysis: Analyzing empirical matter for new meanings. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(2), 148–154. doi: 10.1177/1077800410392336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2006). Rammeplan for barnehagens innhold og oppgaver. Oslo: Akademika [distributør].Google Scholar
  16. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Going beyond the theory: Practice divide in early childhood education: introducingan intra-active pedagogy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. MacLure, M. (2013a). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. MacLure, M. (2013b). The wonder of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 228–232. doi: 10.1177/1532708613487863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MacRae, C. (2011). Making Payton’s Rocket: Heterotopia and lines of flight. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30(1), 102–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01686.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manning, E., & Massumi, B. (2014). Thought in the act: Passages in the ecology of experience. Minniapolis, MN: University of Minnosota press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Odegard, N. (2012). When matter comes to matter: Working pedagogically with junk materials. Education Inquiry, 3(3), 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Odegard, N. (2015). Gjenbruk som kreativ kraft. Når (materi)AL(ite)T henger sammen med alt. Oslo: Pedagogisk forum.Google Scholar
  24. Rhedding-Jones, J. (2007). Who chooses what research methodology? In J. A. Hatch (Ed.), Early childhood qualitative research (pp. 207–221). New York, NY: Rouledge.Google Scholar
  25. Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2005). Writing. A method of Inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 959–978). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  26. Rossholt, N. (2012a). Children’s bodies in time and place: An onto-epistemological approach. Reconceptiualizing Educational Research Methodology, 3(2), 16–25.Google Scholar
  27. Rossholt, N. (2012b). Food as touch/touching the food: The body in place and out-of –place in preschool. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(3), 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sand, M. (2008). Konsten att gunga. Eksperiment som aktiverar mellanrum (PHD). KTH Skolan för Arkitektur och Samhällsbyggnad, Axl books, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  29. Sandvik, N. (2010). The art of/in educational research: Assemblages at work. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 1(1), 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tarr, P. (2003). Reflections on the image of the child: Reproducer or creator of culture. Art Education, 56(4), 6–11. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3194058Google Scholar
  31. Vetlesen, A. J., (Writer) & Myrtveit, A. C., & Njaastad, O. (Directors). (2015). Er naturen til for oss? [Is nature for us?]. Oslo: NRK,Verdibørsen.Google Scholar
  32. Williams, J. (2011). Gilles Deleuze´s philosophy of time: A critical introduction and guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nina Odegard
    • 1
  • Nina Rossholt
    • 2
  1. 1.Oslo and Akershus University CollegeNorway
  2. 2.Oslo and Akershus University CollegeNorway

Personalised recommendations