Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The first purpose of this experimental (post)qualitative research paper is to illustrate diverse possibilities of neurodiverse movement and classroom variations across different spaces in a neurodiversity-affirming summer camp. The summer camp was designed to facilitate the development of computational thinking (CT) using wearable music sensors (WMS) for neurodiverse youth. Both the WMS and CT lessons were co-designed through a research practice partnership and had been previously tried out with neurodiverse middle school students in various settings. Our research question addresses: How do neurodivergent learning spaces map across/within/through physical, pedagogical, and technological flows during a 1-week neurodiversity-affirming summer camp? The second purpose is to experiment with topological mappings as one potential form of neurodivergent data (analysis) interactions. We illustrate how molar/neurotypical and molecular/neurodiverse topological flows potentially structure neurodiverse learning spaces and spacetime. Implications extend to re-conceptualizing possibilities of social research methods and designing neurodiverse, embodied inquiry approaches for neurodiverse educational contexts.

Keywords

postqualitative neurodiversity topology molar-molecular dichotomy assemblage

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alfonso

Tsafoulia

Obeid

(2023). Frameworks for dynamic environments and neurodiversity. Soft, a deployable, stress-relief and, adaptive safe space. In Mostafa

Baumeister

Thomsen

M. R.

Tamke

(Eds.), Design for inclusivity. Sustainable development goals series (pp. 439–451). UIA 2023. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36302-3_31

Armstrong

(2012). Neurodiversity in the classroom: Strength-based strategies to help students with special needs succeed in school and life. ASCD.

Badiou

(2006). Being and event. Continuum.

Beghetto

R. A.

(2013). Killing ideas softly? The promise and perils of creativity in the classroom. Information Age Publishing.

Bergson

(2022). Creative evolution ( Landes

, Trans.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315537818

Bernardi

(2020). Autonomy, spontaneity and creativity in research with children. A study of experience and participation, in central Italy and North West England. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1672280

Brackmann

C. P.

Román-González

Robles

Moreno-León

Casali

Barone

(2017). Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school. Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 65–72). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137069

Brooks

Lainio

Lažetić

(2020). Using creative methods to research across difference. An introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1672281

Cortina

T. J.

(2015). Reaching a broader population of students through unplugged activities. Communications of the ACM, 58(3), 25–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/2723671

10.

Decuypere

Hartong

van de Oudeweetering

(2022). Introduction- Space-and time-making in education: Towards a topological lens. European Educational Research Journal, 21(6), 871–882. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041221076306

11.

de Freitas

. (2014). Diagramming the classroom as a topological assemblage. In Carlin

Wallin

(Eds.), Deleuze and Guattari, politics and education: For a people-yet-to-come (pp. 95–116). Bloomsbury Academic.

12.

Deleuze

Guattari

(1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia ( Massumi

, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1980)

13.

Flemmer

Gill

Kosgei

(2024). Proximity as method: Concepts for coexistence in the global past and present (1st ed.). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

14.

Flint

M. A.

Eaton

P. W.

Smithers

L. E.

(2022). (Navigating-circling-un/doing) ∼Post-qualitative inquiry: A collective biography. Qualitative Inquiry, 29(6), 686–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800422112669

15.

Fox

N. J.

Alldred

(2022). Doing new materialist data analysis: A Spinozo-Deleuzian ethological toolkit. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(5), 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.193307

16.

Gale

(2018). Madness as methodology: Bringing concepts to life in contemporary theorising and inquiry. Routledge.

17.

Glăveanu

V. P.

(2022). Possibility studies: A manifesto. Possibility Studies & Society, 1(1–2), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/27538699221127580

18.

Glăveanu

V. P.

de Saint Laurent

(2025). Methods as horizons of possibility: HOPE for the future. Possibility Studies & Society, 3(2), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/27538699251343157

19.

Guyotte

K. W.

Flint

M. A.

Kidd

B. G.

Potts

C. A.

Irwin

A. J.

Bennett

L. A.

(2020). Meanwhile: Posthuman intra-actions in/with a post-qualitative readings class. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419868497

20.

Huang

Looi

C.-K.

(2021). A critical review of literature on “unplugged” pedagogies in K-12 computer science and computational thinking education. Computer Science Education, 31(1), 83–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2020.1789411

21.

Jackson

Mazzei

(2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. Routledge.

22.

Jones

Kafai

(2024). Mad scholars: Reclaiming and reimagining the neurodiverse academy. Syracuse University Press. https://doi.org/10.1353/book.126590

23.

Judge

S. M.

(2018). Languages of sensing: Bringing neurodiversity into more-than-human geography. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(6), 1101–1119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775817748944

24.

Kopcha

T. J.

Ocak

Qian

(2021). Analyzing children’s computational thinking through embodied interaction with technology: A multimodal perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(4), 1987–2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09832-y

25.

Koro-Ljungberg

(2016). Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology. Sage Publications, Inc.

26.

Koro-Ljungberg

Carlson

Tesar

Anderson

(2015). Methodology brut: Philosophy, ecstatic thinking, and some other (unfinished) things. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(7), 612–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414555070

27.

Lash

(2012). Deforming the figure: Topology and the social imaginary. Theory, Culture & Society, 29(4/5), 261–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276412448829

28.

Le Cunff

A.-L.

Ellis Logan

Ford

Martis

B.-L.

Mousset

Sekibo

Dommett

Giampietro

. (2023). Co-design for participatory neurodiversity research: Collaborating with a community advisory board to design a research study. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.66184

29.

Lury

Parisi

Terranova

(2012). Introduction: The becoming topological of culture. Theory, Culture & Society, 29(4–5), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276412454552

30.

Lury

Wakeford

(Eds.). (2014). Inventive methods: The happening of the social. Routledge.

31.

Lyle

(2018). Possible selves: Restor(y)ing wholeness through autobiographical writing. LEARNing Landscapes, 11(2), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v11i2.961

32.

Manches

McKenna

P. E.

Rajendran

Robertson

(2020). Identifying embodied metaphors for computing education. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, Article 105859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.037

33.

Mazzei

L. A.

(2021). Postqualitative inquiry: Or the necessity of theory. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(2), 198–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800420932607

34.

Müller

(2019). Inside a box: Using objects to collaboratively narrate educator experiences of transformation in higher education. Educational Research for Social Change, 8(1), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.17159/2221-4070/2018/v8i1a4

35.

Niccolini

A. D.

Zarabadi

Ringrose

(2018). Spinning yarns: Affective kinshipping as posthuman pedagogy. Parallax, 24(3), 324–343.

36.

Nolan

McBride

(2015). Embodied semiosis: Autistic ‘stimming’ as sensory praxis. In Trifonas

P. P.

(Ed.), International handbook of semiotics (pp. 1069–1078). Springer.

37.

Nordstrom

S. N.

(2018). Antimethodology: Postqualitative generative conventions. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(3), 215–226.

38.

Oswald

Soppitt

Spencer

Powell

Richardson

Combs

(2024). ‘Safe spaces and places’: The value of design-led methodologies in developing online narratives. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 27(3), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2023.2169489

39.

Phillips

J. W. P.

(2013). On topology. Theory, Culture & Society, 30(5), 122–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276413480951

40.

Ross

(2023). Embracing difference and cultivating hope: The transformative potential of possibility studies. Possibility Studies & Society (Online), 1(1–2), 243–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/27538699231172436

41.

Rousell

(2021). Immersive cartography and post-qualitative inquiry: A speculative adventure in research-creation (1st ed.). Routledge.

42.

Sell

H. L.

(2000). Exactness and precision. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(2), 135–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/136455700405190

43.

Somers-Hall

(2018). The smooth and the striated. In Somers-Hall

Williams

Bell

(Eds.), A thousand plateaus and philosophy (pp. 242–259). Edinburgh University Press. https://philarchive.org/archive/SOMTSA-3

44.

Stenning

Rosqvist

H. B.

(2021). Neurodiversity studies: Mapping out possibilities of a new critical paradigm. Disability & Society, 36(9), 1532–1537. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1919503

45.

Pierre

E. A

. (2021). Why post qualitative inquiry? Qualitative Inquiry, 27(2), 163–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800420931142

46.

Pierre

E. A

. (2022). Poststructuralism and post qualitative inquiry: What can and must be thought. Qualitative Inquiry, 29(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004221122282

47.

Strom

K. J.

Lupinacci

(2019). Putting posthuman theories to work in educational leadership programmes. In Taylor

C. A.

Bayley

(Eds.), Posthumanism and higher education (pp. 103–121). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14672-6_6

48.

Taguchi

H. L.

St. Pierre

E. A.

(2017). Using concept as method in educational and social science inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 643–648.

49.

Thorn

S. D.

(2021). Flows of inhomogeneous matter: Improvising an augmented violin. Organised Sound, 26(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355771821000066

50.

Thorn

S. D.

Sha

X. W.

(2019). Instruments of articulation: Signal processing in live performance. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Movement and Computing (pp. 1–8). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3347122.3347133

51.

Varela

F. J.

Thompson

Rosche

(2017). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience (2nd ed.). MIT Press.

52.

Vasquez

A. M.

(2023). Micromoments in neuroplexure: Creative (professional) learning for post-oppositional transformation in inclusive education (Publication No. 30419700) [Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University]. ProQuest LLC.

53.

Vasquez

A. M.

Wells

T. C.

Basu

Johnson

G. L.

(2022). From technique to technicity: Non-methodological exploration of chairs, neurodiversity, and schooling. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.7577/rerm.5147

54.

Wing

J. M.

(2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215

Topological Mappings of Neurodiverse Learning Space and Flows

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References