Sketch 1 Session Logistics

We will hold this sketch's live workshop on August 17, 2020 at 9 AM EST.

All participants who annotate this essay by August 14th will receive an email with the Zoom link to attend the session.

Live notes will be taken on this document. Please assign at least one note-taker for your session.

Join the 6S Slack channel for any further discussion here.

6S Workshop Code of Conduct

For the 6S virtual workshop, we are utilizing the following code of conduct for online workshops and conferences developed by Eleanor Armstrong and Divya M. Persaud (both University College London), and originally used at the...Read more

PECE Collaboration Agreement

This is the PECE collaboration agreement that lays out the general ethos of working in PECE (the open source software that STS Infrastructures relies on).

In participating in PECE projects which includes 6S workshops, I recognize that:

1)...Read more

Instructions: Round 1

This sketch is designed to help you think about your own thought and work style -- which will help you strategize your own work process while also helping you see what you bring to collaborations. Note that the same questions can be directed at the people or even organizations you study (though it takes quite deep ethnographic material and insight to be able to answer them). You should read these two essays before answering the questions below (which extend from the analyses made in the essays):


After reading the works above, annotate this essay (here) with your responses to the following questions. Copy-paste the questions below into the annotation text field where you will answer them.

  1. Do you have more trouble articulating your frame (social theoretical questions) or object?
  2. Do you tend to project-hop or to stick to a project, and what explains this?
  3. Do you tend to be more interested in internal dynamics, or external determinations? In the terms laid out by Keller, do you tend to focus so intently on the object of your concern that context falls away (i.e. are you obsessive compulsive, rather than paranoid)? Is your desire to name, specify and control your object? Is your desire is for figure, its ground your annoyance? Or are you paranoid, context being your focus and obsession? All is signal. Only begrudgingly will you admit that something is noise, outside the scope of your project? Figure is hard to come by. Its ground has captured your attention.
  4. What do you do with unusual or counter examples? Are you drawn to “the deviant,” or rather repulsed by it?
  5. Do you tend to over-impose logics on the world, or to resist the construction of coherent narratives?
  6. Do you tend to over-generalize, or to hold back from overarching argument?
  7. Do you like to read interpretations different than your own, or do you tend to feel scooped or intimidated by them?
  8. Do you tend to change an argument as you flesh it out, or do you tend to make the argument work, no matter what?
  9. Do you tend to think in terms of “this is kind of like” (metaphorically)? Do you hold to examples that “say it all,” leveraging metonymic thinking?
  10. Do you like gaming understanding in this way? Does it frustrate you that your answers often don’t fit easily on either side of the binaries set up by the questions? (Jakobson suggests that over attachment to a simple binary scheme is a “continuity disorder.”)


Instructions: Round 2

Once all participants have completed their sketches, we will now complete a round of peer review. Click on this annotation question that was used for the sketch. Review your peers' materials and responses. After reviewing, click "Annotate" on the artifact below and select the "6S 2020 Elaborative Peer Review" questions to provide feedback on your peers' responses.