Data as a Material for Design: Alternative Narratives, Divergent Pathways, and Future Directions

To say that data, and the technological “things” that interact with them, are quotidian to the lives of many humans is axiomatic. However, this ubiquity of presence, of availability as a resource, has yet to be met with diversity or plurality of use, craft, and experience. Much of how we see the use of data is still rooted and siloed in utilitarian and analytical perspectives of data. To labor the metaphor, if data were wood, we have only been using them to make simple tables and chairs, not buildings, sculptures, boats, and paper.

This one-day workshop offers diverse members of the CHI community the opportunity to present their unique perspectives on the concept of “data as a material for design”. Through sharing design exemplars and cases of design processes and outputs, we will seek to establish locations for exploration and critique along the following themes: the nature of the data, the processes of data handling, the methods and experiences of data collection and expression, and the risks, tensions, and stumbling blocks of working with data.

We invite diverse submissions that respond to the topic of “data as a material for design.” Topics/questions include but are not limited to:

• The nature of data asks: what data can we collect, notably once we expand our horizons beyond data that is considered “useful” and/or “personal”?
• The process of data handling questions: how do design artefacts, objects, or systems (mis)interpret, alter, or transform the data they interact with?
• The methods and experiences of data collection and expression provoke reflection on: how do we go about generating and displaying data, notably the tools we use to collect and the modalities we use to express these data?
• The risks, tensions, and stumbling blocks of working with data considers: where, when, and why practitioners go wrong, get lost, and how do they overcome these challenges?

Interested participants are invited to submit one or both of the following, using the ACM master template and in PDF format:

• A minimum 2-page Pictorial/image-heavy paper of a case study exemplifying “data as a material for design” will be discussed in the workshop’s morning session.
• A minimum 2-page eyebrow-raising provocation about data, data as a material, or the artefacts that express data in some way for the afternoon session, this could include:
  • A series of diary entries of a 3rd generation data crafter learning the family trade
  • A manual for an artefact that displays private data publicly
  • A manifesto for neo-data-Ludditeism where we must go back to paper-based data entry and/or non-electrical interaction with data

Schedule

This one-day workshop will be broken into two phases. The morning phase (Map and Compare) will consist of a broad summary of all of the accepted work and breakout discussions in studio-style critique in studio-style groups. Participants in each group will present their data-as-material case studies, discussing processes, inspirations, similarities, and differences. Participants are encouraged to share videos, interactive demos, functional prototypes, process documentation, and other artifacts.

The afternoon phase (Provoke and Debate) will bring in the 4 locations described above (nature, process, methods, and tensions of data as material) to provide an initial framework for discussion and critique. Participants will be asked to generate and respond to probing and unusual questions within these locations. for the organizers will prepare an initial set of questions, and participants will generate additional questions. For example, within the locations of the process of handling data or methods and experiences of data collection and expression, one might ask “how could we make a toolkit to work with data, what is the equivalent of chisels, bandsaws, planers, etc. for data? Alternatively, all four locations could be expanded with the broad question: what if we see using data in the way we study art history with surreal, abstract, or baroque styles of (using) data?