Objects, documents, and concepts play a central role in everyday practice but are often overlooked as active agents in the formation of the social world. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is a sociological method that helps make visible what humans and nonhumans in association do or accomplish. It is an analytical approach that examines how human and nonhuman entities co-construct dynamic and influential networks of associations, and the effects produced as a result of these networks. This paper provides an introduction to ANT, illustrates its application through a case example, and concludes with a description of its analytic rewards.
AdamsCAThompsonTL (2011) Interviewing objects: including educational technologies as qualitative research participants. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education24(6): 733–750.
2.
CallonM (1986) Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In LawJ (ed.) Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 196–233.
3.
FenwickTEdwardsR (2011a) Introduction: reclaiming and renewing actor network theory for educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory43(S1): 1–14.
4.
FenwickTEdwardsR (2011b) Considering materiality in educational policy: messy objects and multiple reals. Educational Theory61(6): 709–729.
5.
FreemanM (2014) Shadowing in formative evaluation: Making capacity building visible in a professional development school. American Journal of Evaluation35(4): 562–578.
6.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2014) Being the revolution, or, how to live in a ‘more-than-capitalist’ world threatened with extinction. Rethinking Marxism: A Journal of Economics, Culture & Society26(1): 76–94.
7.
HawkesT (1977) Structuralism and Semiotics. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
8.
Holmes Group (1995) Tomorrow’s Teachers: A Report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing, MI: Author.
9.
LatourB (1993) We Have Never Been Modern (trans. PorterC). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
LatourB (1994) On technical mediation – philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge3(2): 29–64.
11.
LatourB (2004) Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry30(2): 225–248.
12.
LatourB (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13.
McLuhanMMcLuhanE (1988) Laws of Media: The New Science. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
14.
PekarskyD (2007) Vision and education: arguments, counter-arguments, rejoinders. American Journal of Education113(3): 423–450.
15.
VenturiniT (2010a) Diving in magma: how to explore controversies with Actor-Network Theory. Public Understanding of Science19(3): 258–273.
16.
VenturiniT (2010b) Building on faults: how to represent controversies with digital methods. Public Understanding of Science21(7): 796–812.
17.
WattsCM (2008) On mediation and material agency in the Peircean semeiotic. In: KnappettCMalafourisL (eds) Material Agency: Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Approach. New York: Springer.
18.
WilliamsLS (2008) The mission statement: a corporate reporting tool with a past, present, and future. Journal of Business Communication45(2): 94–119.
