hig.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Eriksson, Urban, Lektor i fysik med inriktning mot fysikdidaktikORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-6638-1246
Alternative names
Publications (2 of 2) Show all publications
Airey, J., Eriksson, U., Fredlund, T. & Linder, C. (2014). On the Disciplinary Affordances of Semiotic Resources. In: IACS-2014 Book of abstracts: . Paper presented at The First Conference of the International Association for Cognitive Semiotics, Lund, Sweden, 25-27 Sept 2014 (pp. 54-55).
Open this publication in new window or tab >>On the Disciplinary Affordances of Semiotic Resources
2014 (English)In: IACS-2014 Book of abstracts, 2014, p. 54-55Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In the late 70’s Gibson (1979) introduced the concept of affordance. Initially framed around the needs of an organism in its environment, over the years the term has been appropriated and debated at length by a number of researchers in various fields. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and Norman (1988) about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are only present when they are perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see Linder (2013) for a recent example). Here, Kress et al. (2001) have claimed that different modes have different specialized affordances. Then, building on this idea, Airey and Linder (2009) suggested that there is a critical constellation of modes that students need to achieve fluency in before they can experience a concept in an appropriate disciplinary manner. Later, Airey (2009) nuanced this claim, shifting the focus from the modes themselves to a critical constellation of semiotic resources, thus acknowledging that different semiotic resources within a mode often have different affordances (e.g. two or more diagrams may form the critical constellation).

In this theoretical paper the concept of disciplinary affordance (Fredlund et al., 2012) is suggested as a useful analytical tool for use in education. The concept makes a radical break with the views of both Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the discernment of one individual, it refers to the disciplinary community as a whole. Put simply, the disciplinary affordances of a given semiotic resource are determined by those functions that the resource is expected to fulfil by the disciplinary community. Disciplinary affordances have thus been negotiated and developed within the discipline over time. As such, the question of whether these affordances are inherent or discerned becomes moot. Rather, from an educational perspective the issue is whether the meaning that a semiotic resource affords to an individual matches the disciplinary affordance assigned by the community. The power of the term for educational work is that learning can now be framed as coming to discern the disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources.

In this paper we will briefly discuss the history of the term affordance, define the term disciplinary affordance and illustrate its usefulness in a number of educational settings.

Keywords
Affordances, Disciplinary affordance, Undergraduate Physics, Semiotics
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics General Language Studies and Linguistics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28829 (URN)
Conference
The First Conference of the International Association for Cognitive Semiotics, Lund, Sweden, 25-27 Sept 2014
Funder
Swedish Research Council
Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2018-12-17Bibliographically approved
Airey, J., Eriksson, U., Fredlund, T. & Linder, C. (2014). The Concept of Disciplinary Affordance. In: : . Paper presented at The 5th International 360 Conference, Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge, May 8-10 2014, Aarhus University, Denmark.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Concept of Disciplinary Affordance
2014 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Since its introduction by Gibson (1979) the concept of affordance has been discussed at length by a number of researchers. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and Norman (1988) about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are only present when perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see Linder (2013) for a recent example). Here, Kress et al (2001) claim that different modes have different specialized affordances.

 

In this theoretical paper the concept of disciplinary affordance (Fredlund et al., 2012) is suggested as a useful analytical educational tool. The concept makes a radical break with the views of both Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the perception of an individual, it focuses on the disciplinary community as a whole. Put simply, the disciplinary affordances of a given semiotic resource are determined by the functions that it is expected to fulfil for the discipline. As such, the question of whether these affordances are inherent or perceived becomes moot. Rather, the issue is what a semiotic resource affords to an individual and whether this matches the disciplinary affordance. The power of the term is that learning can now be framed as coming to perceive the disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources.

 

In this paper we will discuss the history of the term affordance, define the term disciplinary affordance and illustrate its usefulness in a number of educational settings.

 

References

Airey, J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton Miffin.

Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

Linder, C. (2013). Disciplinary discourse, representation, and appresentation in the teaching and learning of science. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(2), 43-49.

Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

 

 

Keywords
Disciplinary affordance, learning, semiotics, science education
National Category
Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28830 (URN)
Conference
The 5th International 360 Conference, Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge, May 8-10 2014, Aarhus University, Denmark
Funder
Swedish Research Council
Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2018-12-17Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-6638-1246

Search in DiVA

Show all publications