Frank J Malina Astronautics Medal, Call for Nominations

2018 Call for Nominations


The International Astronautical Federation (IAF) is pleased to announce its 2018 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal that recognises outstanding contributions to space education by an educator who promotes the study of astronautics and space science.

The call for nominations for the Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal is addressed to IAF member organisations in good standing. Only one application per organisation will be accepted per year.

The most important criterion for this award is that an educator “has taken the fullest advantage of the resources available to him/her to promote the study of astronautics and related space sciences”.

One nomination will be accepted per IAF member per year.

Due to the high calibre of nominations, unsuccessful nominations will be carried over for a total of three years.

IAF members are encouraged to update the nomination each year to include the most recent contributions and achievements of the nominee. This updated nomination will be considered the member nomination for that calendar year.

If an updated nomination is not submitted, the IAF member organisation may submit another nomination

If you have a nominee, please submit the following information:

  • 1 nomination letter;
  • The candidate’s credentials, including educational background, work history, awards and honours, and published works;
  • At least 3 letters of recommendation, two professional and one personal; letters from students are encouraged.

The nomination package should be forwarded under cover of a letter from an IAF member organisation, signed by the responsible official of that organisation, and listing the point of contact for any questions. The entire application should not exceed 15 pages.

The Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal recipient will be selected by the Malina Medal Subcommittee who will review the nominations and make a recommendation to the IAF Honours and Awards Committee who will, in turn, make a recommendation for the recipient to the IAF Bureau during the IAF Spring Meetings in March 2018. The final decision rests with the IAF Bureau.

The Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal comprises an engraved commemorative medal and a certificate of citation. The medal will be awarded to the recipient during the International Astronautical Congress (IAC) Closing Ceremony and the recipient will be invited to participate in the Gala Dinner of the IAC as a special guest of the IAF President. In addition, the recipient will deliver the Keynote Address in the E1 Space Education and Outreach Symposium taking place during International Astronautical Congress.

Nomination documents must be received by IAF Secretariat by the 11 February 2018 15:00 CET (Paris time), preferably by email at (Subject line: NOMINEE’S LAST NAME Nominee’s First Name – 2018 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal).

If email is not available, the reference can be sent by postal mail to:
IAF Secretariat
Attention: 2018 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal
3 rue Mario Nikis
75015 Paris
Or by Fax to + 33 1 4273 2120
For further Information about the IAF Honours and Awards programmes, please contact the IAF Secretariat at


emerging role for design methods in transdisciplinary practices, for pre publication peer review


A collaboration led by Prof Mauricio Mejia of Universidad of Caldas has just submitted this paper to ISEA 2018 in Durban South Africa. We hope the paper will be accepted but will be working as a group to develop this work. We solicit suggestions, critiques or offers of collaboration on the problem of our speficially to train emerging professionals in transdisciplinary practices. One of us ( Alex Topete) is working on apprentice training methods, another (Joao Silveira) just submitted his PhD thesis reviewing art science collaboration practices in Brazil and US.

This work is a follow on to the paper and workshop at ISEA 2017 which started an inventory of good practices. (see ref in this paper)

The authors are submitting this paper prior to publication for what is called “pre publication’ peer review which a number of professionals now use as a way of overcoming some of the biases of classic peer review ( which isea is using to decide which papers to accept).


So we welcome comments or criticisms, omissions etc -just contact any of the authors on the paper


Roger Malina


An emerging role for design methods in transdisciplinary practices

  1. Mauricio Mejía1, Cassini Nazir2, Roger F. Malina2, Alex García Topete2, Felipe C. Londoño1, Andrés F. Roldán1, Priscila L. Farias3, João Silveira2,4.

1 Universidad de Caldas

2 University of Texas, Dallas

3 Universidade de São Paulo

4 Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro


This paper is a follow up to some of the authors’ ISEA 2017 paper “Towards an inventory of good practices for transdisciplinary collaboration.” A key issue identified there was how to develop training methods for teams that bridge very different research, development and assessment methodologies. In this paper, we propose design methods to improve transdisciplinary collaborations, with a particular discussion on the emerging community of practice that seeks to enable art-science collaboration. An ISEA workshop is also proposed to make explicit the methodologies described.


ArtScience, design methods, transdisciplinary collaboration , education, training


A contemporary dichotomy in western, and other, academic and industry circles is articulated between science-engineering and art-humanities. This dichotomy can take different forms; for example, hard and soft, quantitative and qualitative, logical and creative, objective and subjective, and so on. Many of these are false, or oversimplifying, dichotomies or reductionist thinking that have lessened our human ability to solve complex problems. These dichotomies are not new. As pointed out by Davis (2018), the roman polymath Marcus Vitruvius Pollio advocated many of the holistic approaches being debated today.  

Nonetheless, some new integrative thinking has emerged to counter this current artificial reductionism in today’s digital culture. For example, the ‘STEM to STEAM’ movement seeks to develop initiatives that integrate the arts, design, and humanities with science, technology, and medicine (e.g., Malina, Strohecker, & LaFayette, 2013). However, there is a clear need to develop new methods for transdisciplinary collaboration that take into account todays digital culture context (Mejia, Malina, & Roldán, 2017, p. 685). In this paper, we reflect on the use of design methods to improve transdisciplinary collaborations in order to overcome the chiasm and biases of these false dichotomies.

Within that framework and for the purposes of this paper, transdisciplinarity entails not only crossing disciplinary boundaries but also crossing sectors of society to include all the stakeholders involved or affected by an issue (Repko, 2007, p. 15). Within this approach to transdisciplinarity, design practices are particularly relevant because they are concerned with ‘doing’ to solve problems. Thus, using design methods in collaborations between researchers and citizens helps to focus not only in social appropriation of knowledge but also in addressing problems that are pressing in place based territories.

Scholars, for long, have discussed whether the design practice is an art or a science. For example, in Calvera (2003) authors debated the relationship between art and design. Arguably, design is both art and science. Some authors have strongly contended that design practice is different from science to avoid the common confusion that scientific research methods can be used to solve design problems (see Krippendorff, 2007). In this paper, we discuss how design methods incorporate mindsets and techniques from both art and science, such as embedded observation borrowed from ethnography and sociology, or fast prototyping that echoes of sketching by visual artists. This integrative designerly approach leads us to propose that design methods are a potential tool for transdisciplinary collaboration.

Art and science, Art Science, ArtScience, Sciart (and more…)

For the past several hundred years, the paths of artistic expression and scientific endeavor have diverged increasingly, prompted by developments within academia and industry (such as the emergence of  disciplinary departments of study and the division of labor, respectively). Moreover, the divergence kindled the philosophical questions of “what is (good) art?” and “what is (good) science?”, further separating the two in ways that have led to a profound difference of identity between scientists-engineers and artists-humanists despite their similarities in practices and philosophies (Leach, 2011, pp. 144-146).

For the authors, art has the following general characteristics:

  • Art, like design and science, is a creative endeavor.
  • Artists try to change the perception of humans through attaching meanings to experiences .
  • There is research in art and design, which is similar to research in science.

For the authors, science has the following characteristics:

  • Science is the human activity which seeks to understand causal mechanisms in phenomena that can be observed by humans.
  • Scientists seek to produce knowledge and understanding that are not biased by the human cognitive apparatus.
  • Scientific research seeks to predict things that happen in the world.
  • Engineering, design, and other applied sciences use design methods.

Although art and science seem to be identifiable categories, some human activities are ambiguous or integrative. For Strosberg (2015), art and science today often share the same tools and materials and technology becomes their main connection (p. 23). Frayling (1993) argued that there is not much difference between art and science. He said that the history of institutions and media has shaped stereotypes that have mistakenly separated art and science practices; for instance, in their practice, artists do research activities and scientists do creative activities (p. 3). For these reasons, integrating artists and scientists in collaborative work is a cultural and institutional challenge.

Recently, some universities are increasingly offering academic programs and research in art and science. One example, in which some authors are affiliated, is the ArtSci Lab at the University of Texas at Dallas. ArtSci lab states that “[they] are a transdisciplinary research lab—helping the arts, science, and technology communities by pursuing initiatives of societal urgency and cultural timeliness;” one of the used methodologies is designing projects with collaboration between artists and scientists from the inception. In France, initiatives such as the SACRE PhD program ( ) trains PhD students across art and science disciplines. The Carasso Foundation ( ) also recently created the first university chair in Art Science bridging disciplinary institutions.

One critical issue that justifies the need for arts/humanities and science integration is the recognized demand that science and technology should not be separated from social practices and belief systems in human groups. In the Frankfurt School, science had a social function, which means that scientific problems are expected to respond to a collective interest (Horkheimer, 1998).  Helga Nowotny, former President of the European Research Council, has called for ‘socially robust science’ (Nowotny, 2003, p. 151-153). The multiples initiative of art and science in their different flavors all aim to tackle the demand for social-centered ways of knowing.

Design methods

One of the core issues in the history of design methods is the tension between intuition and rationality. Design education in Europe and the US originated in art and craft schools; thus, designers relied primarily on creative intuition and implicit knowledge. In early 20th century, western design education was based on the master-apprentice model, in which novice-students practiced in studios with expert-instructors to learn design crafts. Some traditional learning techniques include analyzing exemplars, sketching, prototyping, and critiques. These techniques are based on intuition because little evidence from the real-world is used for decision-making. In the 1960’s, the design methods movement appeared, and several of its proponents, such as early Christopher Alexander advocated for rational methods in design to address the increasing complexity of design problems (Alexander, 1964, pp. 8-11). Soon, the excitement about more logic and less intuition in the design process was questioned by Alexander himself and others; in the 1970’s, ‘second and third order’ design methods emerged exploring the participation of the users in the process and revisions about the role of intuition in design thinking (Cross, 1984, pp. 303–307). Particularly, the work of Rittel showed that rational approaches from engineering and science are insufficient to address ‘wicked’ problems of planning because these problems are ill-defined and elusive (Rittel & Webber, 1973, p. 160). The discussion between rationality and intuition is also present beyond design; for instance, within the cognitive science communities researchers now seek ways to ‘train’ intuition and imagination (see

A seminal work in design thinking is the book Designerly ways of Knowing by Nigel Cross, which positions design as a third ‘culture’ different from both (a) arts and humanities and (b) science. He suggested that designerly thinking is an alternative different from artistic and scientific thinking (Cross, 2006, p. 018). For example, he said that whereas scientists use analysis to solve problems, designers use synthesis. Cross explained:

The designer is constrained to produce a practicable result within a specific time limit, whereas the scientist and scholar are both able, and often required, to suspend their judgments and decisions until more is known – ‘further research is needed’ is always a justifiable conclusion for them (p. 023).

Nigel Cross (2006) distinguished between scientific, artistic/humanistic, and designerly ways of knowing to capture the idea that different disciplines use different research and development methodologies to make sense of the world, its phenomena and its processes. Each discipline develops different evaluation methodologies to assess what is more or less “good” within its own approach. Cross noted differences between the sciences, arts/humanities, and design in the phenomenon studied, the appropriate methods, and values (see table 1).


Table 1. Cross’ ways of knowing

Sciences Arts/Humanities Design
Phenomenon of study The natural world Human experience The artificial world
Appropriate methods Controlled experiment, classification, analysis Analogy, metaphor, evaluation Modelling, pattern-formation, synthesis
Values of each culture Objectivity, rationality, neutrality, and a concern for ‘truth’ Subjectivity, imagination, commitment, and a concern for ‘justice’ Practicality, ingenuity, empathy, and a concern for ‘appropriateness’


A practical, well-known, and contemporary design method is the double-diamond model (The Design Council, 2014). In Figure 1, the left sides of the diamonds represent divergent thinking and the right sides represent convergent thinking. In this model, the Discover phase can be associated to rational research processes; however, design research is often conducted under time constraints that force a flexibility in the validity of data and the goal is to inform design-decision making instead of generation of scientific knowledge. Also, the Develop phase can be associated with intuitive artistic processes. There is intuition in the process, but a difference is that the goal is to find a satisficing practical solution not to seek the sole subjective expression of the designer.

(omitted because we dont have ok from the authors of this illustration yet to republish)

Figure 1. Adaptation of Design Council’s double-diamond model. Design by Luana Carolina and João Silveira


Christian Rohrer’s Landscape of User Research Methods (2014) proposes a visualization of the landscape of design methods within two axes: attitudinal and behavioral, and qualitative versus quantitative (see figure 2). These are more methodological tools that can be implemented depending on the situation and designer’s decisions. The methodological tools on Rohrer’s landscape have various purposes depending on the needs and phases of the project. Some tools are generative, used in early ideation; exploratory, for concept generation and understanding criteria; or evaluative, testing of the system. The process and methods of design described above allow designers to create possible futures, much of which would not come to be naturally.


Figure 2.  Rohrer’s grid, showing 20 popular methodological tools of design

(omitted because we dont have ok from the authors of this illustration yet to republish)


A recent approach in the field is codesign. It is a collaborative design practice in which two or more designers, or participants from different disciplines, come together in an articulated and integrated manner to design products and services. Sanders and Stappers (2008, p. 2; 2012, p. 30) define codesign as a specific instance of cocreation in which collective creativity is applied throughout the design development process. Collective creativity refers both to the set of creative qualities that the design proposal entails and to the creativity of the tasks carried out as part of this process (Yu, Nickerson and Sakamoto, 2012, p. 1). The codesign method is a place for the negotiation of ideas and approaches according to the knowledge, arguments, and points of view of the participants, their qualities directly influence the decision-making process (Jin and Geslin, 2008, p. 494; Klein et al. ., 2003, p. 201). The collaborative approach in codesign makes it a particular design method of interest for training people in transdisciplinary collaboration, even when the goal is not to design a product or service (e.g., designing the structure of a collaboration).

Design methods as a good practice for transdisciplinary collaboration

In the design methods section above, it is shown that design (thinking and methods) is a way of knowing different from art and science. However, design methods also incorporate artistic and scientific activities within several steps. We argue here that the use of design methods is and can be a potential good practice for transdisciplinary collaboration. In this context, we understand transdisciplinary practice as a unifying fusion of disciplines, in which it is not possible to distinguish a single discipline in the process and outcome (Pombo, 2008, p.14-15). The rationale is based on the idea that the design field already struggled, historically, to develop methods and proved that neither artistic or scientific thinking alone were sufficient to address complex social wicked problems, which are the type of problems often addressed in transdisciplinary collaborations.

Design methods have been applied not only to design physical artifacts but also for intangibles like services and collaborations. High order design problems such as interactions, services, environments, and systems (see Buchanan, 1992) need more thoughtful methods and processes that usually involve the participation of different stakeholders and collaboration among designers, other disciplines, and users. Increasingly design problems are addressed by transdisciplinary teams and have shown successful integrations of diverse designerly ways of knowing (e.g., Brown, 2007). Solving problems using design methods is a potent practice to facilitate transdisciplinary collaborations. For example, transdisciplinary projects aimed for innovation tend to turn the participants into problem-solving designers, which has been the exemplary case of Aerocene, a transdisciplinary collaborative effort to accomplish lighter-than-air travel, and of IndaPlant, an attempt at merging robotics and plants to automate biodomes (Garcia Topete, Malina, Strohecker, & Thill, 2017, p. 6).

Transdisciplinary collaborations involve professionals with very different, though overlapping ways of knowing. We have argued that one of the benefits of transdisciplinary collaborations is to draw on different ways of knowing to overcome limitation and biases inherent in each when appropriate, but also to benefit with alternate methodologies. We argue against the idea of simple ‘consilience’ (Wilson, 1999) as a way of integrating together different ways of knowing, but draw on Slingerland and Collard’s concept of using integrating methods in different ways depending on scale in time, size, or other metrics of phenomena or problems being addressed (Slingerland & Collard, 2011). We argue that design methodologies are an appropriate approach to designing transdisciplinary collaborations (which may or may not in themselves involve designers as one of the disciplines, and may or may not be about designing a product or service as the outcome of the collaboration).

Reflecting on the idea of transdisciplinarity as crossing boundaries in sectors of society (Repko, 2007), design methods can be a strategy for collaborations between citizens and experts. A potential role of design is to dynamize the social appropriation of artistic and scientific knowledge. Design itself is moving towards more collaborative approaches to solve problems and create complex sociotechnical systems.  

It can be argued that a major weakness of design practitioners is the lack of reflective practice, which is critical in the flow of transdisciplinary collaboration. Most design processes often omit (or at best tacitly include) reflection as a needed part of the process. Schon’s model of reflective practice can enable double-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978), where the mental models and views of the world can be refined, updated and changed based on new understanding of the world. Reflective practice is particularly relevant when working with a transdisciplinary group that sometimes have varied understanding and viewpoints of the world.

The issue of how to train professionals engaged in transdisciplinary projects is rising in importance. For instance, at the University of Texas at Dallas, under the leadership of Dean Anne Balsamo a new masters in how to teach in ways that embody “STEM to STEAM’ concepts is under development; this work draws on Balsamo’s research such as Designing Culture: The Technological Imagination at Work (2011). The SACRE PhD in Paris, cited above, is a different approach. Key issues involve identifying and transferring implicit knowledge between different disciplines using apprenticeship methodologies, and experimental publishing methodologies for knowledge capture (e.g., Hall, Bermell-Garcia, Ravindranath, & McMahon, 2017).

In addition to the paper proposed by the authors, a proposal for an ISEA workshop has also been submitted. The authors look forward to collaborating with the ISEA community of practice in developing good training methods for transdisciplinary collaborations.


Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard University Press.

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Balsamo, A., ( 2011). Designing Culture: The Technological Imagination at Work. Durnham, NC: Duke University Press.

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8 (2), 5–21.

Calvera, A. (Ed.). (2003). Arte¿?Diseño: Nuevos capítulos para una polémica que viene de lejos. Barcelona, Spain: Gustavo Gili.

COGNOVO. Cognitive Innovation Program. ( jan 20 2018).

Cross, N. (Ed.). (1984). Developments in design methodology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London, UK: Springer.

Davis, J. (2018) Unification of Knowledge. Leonardo Journal. In press.

Frayling, C. (1993). Research in art and design (Vol. 1). London, UK: RCA Research Papers.

Garcia Topete, A., Malina, R., Strohecker, C., Thill, R. (2017) SEAD Exemplars: Evidence of the Value of Transdisciplinary Projects. SEAD Committee. Retrieved from

Hall, M., Bermell-Garcia, P., Ravindranath, R., & McMahon, C. (2017). Lessons learnt from experts in design rationale knowledge capture. In A. Maier, S. Škec, H. Kim, M. Kokkolaras, J. Oehmen, G. Fadel, … M. Van der Loos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) (Vol. 6 Design Information and Knowledge, pp. 247–256). Vancouver, Canada: The Design Society.

Horkheimer, M. (1998). Teoría Crítica (2nd ed.). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Amorrortu Editores.

Jin, Y., & Geslin, M. (2008). Roles of negotiation protocol and strategy in collaborative design. In J. S. Gero & A. K. Goel (Eds.), Design Computing and Cognition’08 (pp. 491–510). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Klein, M., Sayama, H., Faratin, P., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2006). The dynamics of collaborative design: Insights from complex systems and negotiation research. In D. Braha, A. Minai, & Y. Bar-Yam (Eds.), Complex Engineered Systems. Understanding Complex Systems (pp. 158–174). Berlin: Springer.

Krippendorff, K. (2007). Design research, an oxymoron? In R. Michel (Ed.), Design research now. Essays and selected projects (pp. 67–80). Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.

Leach, J. (2011). The Self of the Scientist, Material for the Artist: Emergent Distinctions in an Interdisciplinary Collaboration. Social Analysis, 55(3), 143–163.

Malina, R., Strohecker, C., & LaFayette, C. (2013). Steps to an Ecology of Networked Knowledge and Innovation: Enabling New Forms of Collaboration among Sciences, Engineering, Arts, and Design (SEAD). MIT Press. Retrieved from

Mejia, G. M., Malina, R. F., & Roldán, A. F. (2017). Towards an inventory of best practices for transdisciplinary collaboration (pp. 681–687). Presented at the 23rd International Symposium on Electronic Arts ISEA2017, Manizales, Colombia: Universidad de Caldas.

Nowotny, H. (2003) Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Science and Public Policy 30 (3), pp. 151–156.

Pombo, O. (2008). Epistemologia da interdisciplinaridade. Ideação, 10 (1), pp. 9-40.

Repko, A. F. (2008). Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4 (2), 155–169.

Rohrer, C. (2014, October 12). When to Use Which User-Experience Research Methods. Retrieved January 15, 2017, from

Sanders, E., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4 (1), 5–18.

Sanders, E., & Stappers, P. J. (2012). Convivial design toolbox: Generative research for the front end of design. Amsterdam, Netherlands: BIS Publishers.

Slingerland, E., & Collard, M. (2011). Creating Consilience: Integrating the Sciences and the Humanities. Oxford University Press.

Strosberg, E. (2015). Art and Science (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Abbeville Press.

The Design Council. (2014). The Design Process: What is the Double Diamond? Retrieved December 22, 2017, from

Wilson, E. O. (1999). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Vintage Books.

Yu, L. L., Nickerson, J. V., & Sakamoto, Y. (2012). Collective Creativity: Where we are and where we might go. Proceedings of Collective Intelligence. Retrieved from

Leonardo LABS 2018 call for Phd, MFA and MA abstracts in the art,science,technology fields

Dear Colleagues,

Leonardo LABS 2018 call for PhD, MFA and MA abstracts in the art, science,  technology fields


As we near the end of the academic year, we want to bring the Leonardo Abstract Service (LABS) service to the attention of students and educators.

Students who will be getting an M.A., M.F.A. or PhD, before July 2018,  in a subject related to the intersection of art, science and/or technology are encouraged to submit an abstract of their thesis to the LABS database.

While the abstract needs to be written, theses can be written or an artistic work in any media. The LABS database functions as a way for international artists and scholars to learn about the work of the next generation. The database is peer-reviewed, and the top-ranking authors are invited to submit an article on their work for publication in Leonardo Journal published by MIT Press.  Additionally, abstracts ranked as first or second tier by the peer reviewers are published in the Leonardo Newsletter.


The next deadline for submissions is June 30, 2018. Please bring the LABS database to the attention of your students.  Also, please forward this information to other appropriate faculty. Do not hesitate to contact us or have them contact us with questions. You can view the database at Abstracts and their titles must be in English, but the thesis itself can be in English, Spanish or French. In coming years we will broaden the range of thesis languages included. 



Sheila Pinkel                                                               

Editor in Chief, English Language LABS

 Joao Silveira

 Latin American Representative

Roger Malina, Executive Editor, Leonardo Publications,

Yeah Jasia Reichardt you were right 50 years ago ! Announcing a major conference


It is with immense pleasure that I bring to your attention the first major art science symposium at the US National Academy of Science, with support from Leonardo/ISAST on our 50th anniversary year !

Revisiting Cybernetics Serendipity: Creativity and Collaboration

AND the opening talk will be by Marcia McNutt, President of the US National Academy of Science followed by …JASIA REICHARDT !!! whose celebrated Cybernetics Serendipity exhibition in 1968 was part of the  launch wave of art/science/technology practice in the 1960s. The exhibit was published in a special issue of Studio International who is also supporting the conference.

Registration begins Dec 1   

Our goals are modest with this conference !!

“Our ambition is to redirect the history of ideas, restoring the Leonardo-like close linkage between art/design and science/engineering/medicine.  We believe that internet-enabled collaborations can make more people more creative more of the time.”

( not sure I really want to get into creativity theory myself !! but my own input to the conference is the urgent need to redesign science itself- both the scientific method and its social embedding , as i have argued earlier in a series of blogs ,and  that we need to resign science itself to overcome the tragedy of the internet, through among other things expanding the citizen science movement to fully supported professional amateurs    )


There will be a great full day conference on the 12 of New Leonardo’s- graduate students from around the US.

AND just to add to the festivities there will be a Leonardo 50th birthday party with Jasia Reichardt at the DASER on Thursday the 15th at the National Academy of Science organised by J.D. Talasek.

Here are the details

Creativity and Collaboration:

Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity  

March 13-14, 2018; Washington, D.C.
Organized by Ben Shneiderman, Maneesh Agrawala, Donna Cox, Alyssa Goodman, Youngmoo Kim, and Roger Malina

REGISTRATION WILL OPEN DECEMBER 1                                                                    

Our ambition is to redirect the history of ideas, restoring the Leonardo-like close linkage between art/design and science/engineering/medicine.  We believe that internet-enabled collaborations can make more people more creative more of the time.


Tuesday March 13, 2018

9:00am Opening: Marcia McNutt, President NAS

Introduction: Ben Shneiderman, University of Maryland, Rock the Research: Embrace Design, Rediscover Visual, and Go Social

Opening Talk: Jasia Reichardt, Cybernetic Serendipity Exhibit Organizer, In anticipation of the sixties

10:30am BREAK


Session 1: Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity:  A Catalyst for Research Breakthroughs

The 1968 Cybernetics Serendipity exhibit proved to be generative of art/design and research directions that were fruitful and beneficial for science/engineering/medicine.   This session provides an historical perspective while speculating about which directions and exemplars hold promise for the coming decades.  

Session Chair: Roger Malina, University of Texas, Dallas

Sara Diamond, OCAD University, Modeling New Knowledges – An Inclusive STEAM + D Imperative

Curtis Wong, Microsoft, Inc.,  Leonardo da Vinci: Art/Science as the virtuous cycle of rendering and understanding natural world

Patrick McCray, University of California, Santa Barbara, All Watched Over and Watching Machines of Loving, Sometimes Terrifying, Grace

12:20pm LUNCH


Session 2: Information Visualization, Data Art/Design, Data Journalism: Revealing Hidden Worlds

Visualization exposes surprising patterns in data, influences the direction of research, and produces unexpected insights. How does interactive, immersive, and large-data visualizations enhance exploration, discovery, and presentation of research results?  Visualization clarifies thinking for researchers and policy makers.  

Session 2a:

Maneesh Agrawala, Stanford University, Deconstructing Charts and Graphs

Jeff Heer, University of Washington, Constructing Charts and Graphs

Alyssa Goodman, Harvard, Smithsonian, The Road from Explanation to Exploration, and Back

3:00pm  BREAK


Session 2b:

Donna Cox, University of Illinois, High Impact Visualizations: The Potential of Visualization Research to Inform Science Funding and Public Opinion

Katy Borner, Indiana University, Data Visualization Literacy: Research and Tools that Advance Public Understanding of Scientific Data

Fernanda Viegas, Google, Inc.,

Jonathan Corum, New York Times, Revealing Hidden Worlds: Visualizing Science at The New York Times

5:00pm Reception

6:00pm Annual Sackler Lecture

             TO BE ANNOUNCED

Wednesday March 14, 2018


Session 3: Integrating Art & Design Education with Science, Engineering & Medicine

Breakthroughs are increasingly through collaborative efforts spanning multiple disciplines. This session explores integrations of art and design with science, engineering, and medicine. Does such integration have the potential for developing researchers and professionals better prepared to incorporate multiple perspectives, accept new ideas, with greater capacity to work with diverse team members?

David Skorton, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution, Integrating Higher Education in the Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine:  A consensus report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, Board on Higher Education and Workforce

Panel Discussion and Reflections with Report Committee Members

  – David Skorton, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution

  – Tom Rudin, Director, NRC Board on Higher Education and Workforce

  – Pamela Jennings, Construkts

  – Youngmoo Kim (moderator), Drexel University

10:30am BREAK


Session 3b: Session Chair: Youngmoo Kim, Drexel University

Robert Root-Bernstein, Michigan State University, How Arts, Crafts and Design Training Benefit STEMM Professionals: The Evidence and It’s Limitations

John Maeda, Global Head of Computational Design + Inclusion, Automattic (Invited), Design, Technology, and Inclusion for Advancing Learning

Suzanne Bonamici, Congresswoman, Oregon (Invited), The Congressional STEAM Caucus

12:20pm LUNCH


Session 4: Social Media, Citizen Science & Team Research

How to harness the power of collaboration, participation & teamwork to accelerate research?

In the past, individual “heroes” were celebrated, but today, evidence powerfully supports collaborative projects which bring together diverse talents.  This session presents effective strategies for communication and collaboration in two-person partnerships, small and large teams, and massive citizen science projects. 

Session 4a:

Jennifer Preece, University of Maryland, Citizen Science Speaks to Research: New Paradigms, New Agendas and Broader Impacts

Laura Trouille, Adler Planetarium & Zooniverse Project, Tales from the Zooniverse: Enabling Serendipity and Creativity through Citizen Science

Julia K Parrish, University of Washington, The Promise of Citizen Science: Scale, Technology, Agency and Saving the World

3:00pm BREAK


Session 4b: Session Chair: Alyssa Goodman

Niki Kittur, Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Scaling Up Serendipity: Augmenting Analogical Innovation with Crowds and AI

Zeynep Tufekci, writer, academic, and self-styled “techno-sociologist”,

5:00pm END


This unique interdisciplinary experience is two distinct but related events that include the Student Symposium on March 12 and the Colloquium on March 13-14.

//// Role/Play: Collaborative Creativity and Creative Collaborations Student Fellows Symposium

March 12, 2018, Washington D.C.
Supported by the Arthur M. Sackler Foundation for the Arts, Sciences and Humanities and Google, Inc.
Organized by Liese Liann Zahabi and Molly Morin 

50 North American graduate students enrolled in masters and doctoral programs across all disciplines have been selected to participate in the Monday, March 12 Student Fellows Symposium and attend the Sackler Colloquium which follows on March 13-14, (please note that the selected students are expected to attend all three days of events).  

Scientists thinking like artists—artists thinking like scientists. When these traditionally defined roles mix together, how is the process of making work or conducting research altered? Does the play between disciplines benefit a designer’s practice, an engineer’s output, or a scientist’s data? What are the hazards and opportunities? 

Student Fellow Symposium Agenda

Awards will include registration for all three days for all awardees (includes some meals during the conference).  West coast students will receive $800 in travel subsidy, students traveling from the Northeast, Midwest, and Southeast will receive $600 in travel subsidy. Local students in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia will receive registration for all three days, but no travel support.  Selections will be finalized by December 1, 2017 and all applicants notified by email.

Major support for the student symposium has been provided by the Dame Jillian and Dr. Arthur M. Sackler Foundation for the Arts, Sciences, and Humanities, which also support the colloquium series; and Google, Inc.


Additional support for the colloquium has been provided by Science Sandbox – a Simons Foundation initiative, Studio International and Leonardo/ISAST.



Leonardo Awards for Excellence in Peer Reviewing: Rosemary Mountain, Asimina Kaniari, Nuno Correia,  Carol Bier


As a result of 50 years of publishing work on the cutting edge, Leonardo has become the leading international peer-reviewed journal on the use of contemporary science and technology in the arts and music and, increasingly, the application and influence of the arts, design and humanities on science and technology. In the United States, this phenomenon is sometimes called “STEM to STEAM.”

Constructive peer reviews are critical to Leonardo’s publication process. Leonardo relies on its expert peer reviewers to address work across disciplines with academic rigor and a sympathetic intelligence that provides our authors with insights that allow them to present their work as strongly and clearly as possible. This is particularly difficult in reviewing trans-disciplinary work.

This month we commence a quarterly recognition of exceptional peer reviewers in our network. We extend our gratitude and congratulations to the following for their in-depth and deeply constructive feedback on papers under consideration for publication.

Carol Bier
Carol Bier is a Research Scholar with the Center for Islamic Studies at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley CA. A historian of Islamic art, her interdisciplinary research focuses on patterns as intersections of art and mathematics.

Nuno Correia
Nuno N. Correia is a researcher and audiovisual artist. He is interested in interactive multi-sensorial experiences. He is currently Assistant Professor at Madeira Interactive Technologies Institute (M-ITI).

Asimina Kaniari
Asimina Kaniari is Assistant Professor in Art History at the Athens School of Fine Arts and a Seeger Fellow for Fall 2017 at Princeton University looking at transfers from avant-garde art practice into art publishing from the late 1960s in relation to pop and the print aesthetic.

Rosemary Mountain 
Rosemary Mountain is an artist/researcher whose explorations led her to question numerous aspects of standard music training, and to develop alternate analytical strategies and methods to express different perspectives.

As part of our Leonardo activities at the UTDallas ArtSciLab  we have launched an initiative in what we call ‘experimental publishing”. Yes publication experiments are a research field and in many ways more difficult than astrophysics. The initiative is co piloted by Researchers Cassini Nazir, Chaz Lilly and myself. Chaz is doing a phd on experimental publishing – see his web site for more details  The testbed for these experiments is our new ARTECA.MIT.EDU platform.


We will be working with our exceptional peer reviewers Rosemary Mountain, Asimina Kaniari, Nuno Correia,  Carol Bier and future Leonardo Exception Peer Reviewer award winners to tap into their expertise  on how best to evolve our systems of peer reviewing so that the good stuff rises to the top, while being aware that sometimes the good stuff is only recognised years from now.


With thanks again to Rosemary Mountain, Asimina Kaniari, Nuno Correia,  Carol Bier for their contributions in helping Leonardo become the second ranked visual art journal in google scholar !

Roger Malina

ArtScience Public Engagement and Citizen Science- Professional Amateurs here we come !


Here is a great new initiative in Venice through the science gallery initiative ! 

Breaking boundaries and creating collisions in science, art, technology and innovation

As I have argued before in this blog, the emerging citizen science movement is rapidly

maturing and we can anticipate a situation with a growing number of professional

amateurs carrying out a growing amount of scientific research, not just data collection

or on line labor, but also data analysis and scientific results. I think this is one real

response to Helga Nowotny’s call for a move to ‘socially robust’ science, and as

this initiative describes this MA would lead to the training of socially robust

scientists and other professionals.

Maybe 50 years from now a significant fraction of all scientific research will  be

done by professional amateurs- changing the implicit biases in the direction

that science takes at a given moment in society.

Does anyone know of other initiatives that link the artscience movement

to the professionalisation of citizen scientists ? ( in french Levy Leblond and

Steigler talk of the ‘amatorat’)


roger malina

here are the details:

Ca’ Foscari University of Venice presents a new professional master’s
degree in public engagement on the fascinating interactions among art,
science, technology and innovation. The multifaceted world concerning
art, science and technology is enjoying unprecedented growth and an
appropriate public engagement and communication strategy is needed for
creating a responsible, responsive and ethical society.

This professional master’s, in collaboration with every Science
Gallery in  the Global Science Gallery Network, supports, promotes and
fosters the worldwide growing vibrant culture of art-science
communication and public engagement. It involves and connects renowned
national and international science communication organisations and
offers opportunities for work-based projects and future placements.

Prospective master’s students will learn how to engage the public and
raise awareness on scientific issuesby facilitating, launching and
managing dialogue and debates, how to apply the most effective
interviewing tools, to write effective press releases and policy
briefings, and will also take advantage of citizen science to foster
and engage the local community. They will also learn and practice
techniques to put the public in contact with science through a
visionary unprecedented artistic point of view.

Target applicants:
– Scientists
– Public and science engagement managers
– Event managers
– Museum managers
– Science communicators
– Public information officers
– Policy consultants
– Innovation influencers
– Creative entrepreneurs
– Graduate students

Professional profiles:
-Engagement managers in Science, Art, Technology and Innovation
– Science, Art, Technology and Innovation communicators
-Public Information officers
-Education officers
-Policy consultants
-Innovation influencers
-Knowledge brokers
-Creative entrepreneurs

Language: the course is fully taught in English
Available places: 40
Duration of the programme: one year
Period: March 2018 – March 2019
Teaching method: classroom-based lessons held by The Global Science
Gallery Network  key representatives
Location: Venice – Vega Park
Deadline for application submission: December 4th, 2017
Enrollment fees: € 15.000, accommodation costs included
Grants/scholarships: full or partial scholarships covering the
registration fee, if given, will be provided by the institution.

For information about submission of admission applications, please
contact the Coordinating Office:
Ca’ Foscari Challenge School:
tel. (+39) 041 234 6853 (9am – 1pm GMT+1)
fax (+39) 041 234 6801

For information about the course contents and calendar click HERE or contact:


Help Enable the Emerging Leonardos, both teams and inviduals !

Colleagues !

Subject: Leonardo has  fulfilled it’s original mission, now let’s shut it down ?!

Don’t worry, we’re not shutting down quite yetwe are hoping to codesign the future of our organization with you.   

My father and other kinetic artists in Paris in the 1950s wanted to show their work; they were told by museums, galleries and critics: If you have to plug it in, it can’t be Art. They wanted to write about their work and their technical innovations; the same art world told them: Artists don’t write, they have nothing to say. Artists paint, art critics do the writing. My father was American; he was told to go show his work in New York, not Paris. And why didnt artists read art theory !

Sixty years ago, a group of artists, scientists and engineers coalesced in Paris, leading to the early kinetic art and computer art movements. Similar groups met in other cities. In my parents home there were such meetings around food and wine, and the participants got themselves organized. Historian and critic Frank Popper championed their work, as did Ernst Gombrich, Buckminster Fuller, C.P. Snow and many others such as Jasia Reichardt. They succeeded.

Our world has changed:  Our community is geographically mobile; Digital culture has started to establish the new forms of art responsive to our own times; artists publish on their own on the web, with their own documentation and ideas.

Has Leonardo become unnecessary? Yes and No. Our growing academic community needs traditional peer reviewed journals. But they also need multimodal and multimedia ways of documenting their work and showing it to others. And they also need to publish in languages other than English. Next year we will publish our first Leonardo issue in Chinese.

With the community and MIT Press, we are designing a new publishing and collaboration platform. ARTECA is a gated commons that gives free open access to the content to anyone who contributes to the content (artists, authors), to the quality of the content (reviewers) and to its pertinence (editorial advisors). If you fall into any of these categories, contact me for your free access ( .

We hope this ‘gated commons’ approach to open access will help overcome the ‘Tragedy of the Internet” that is disrupting our lives.

The transdisciplinary community is growing, as is evidenced by the Leonardo LASER program now in 29 global cities. Documentation for this moment in history is being archived on ARTECA with the LASER videos and the Creative Disturbance podcasts. To respond to the influx of narrative data in all media, our next step will be to publish and archive key “gray literature,” such as the websites of the pioneers in our community, but also the kinds of new services needed by digital culture.

Let me also take this opportunity to thank the colleagues who have hosted or will host one of the 20 scheduled Leonardo Birthday parties in their communities (

We need your involvement and support  in co-designing the future organization, projects and publications.

And for those of you in a position to make donations you can add Leonardo/ISAST as an organization that benefits when you buy through Amazon (   You can also donate through Leonardo’s website ( For those of you that are US residents, these donations are tax deductible to the extent allowed by the law. You can also choose to make your donation for the Steve Wilson Fellowship, that has been generously endowed by Sonia Sheridan ( )

In 2019 we will celebrate the 500th anniversary of the passing of our namesake Da Vinci and see how the emerging Leonardos today, both individuals and teams, are having  the kind of social outcomes that the Renaissance had. We know this grandiose outcome cannot be designed but hopefully Leonardo, working with you, can serve as enablers for the emerging Leonardos, both teams and individuals, over the next 50 years

If you want to think aloud with us:

Respond or insert some of the comments from this feedback link.

Roger F Malina

Founder and Board Member, Leonardo, International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology

Announcing first Creative Disturbance Podcast in Kannada Language of Karnataka Gari Means Feather


We are delighted to announce the launch of the Gari podcast channel on Creative Disturbance 

The podcast is spoken in Kannada, the language of Karnataka,India- the channel is Produced by ATEC MA student working in the ArtSciLab in ATEC, UTDallas ( )- and his hosted by his father, Jayant Kaikini, in India.


One of the goals of Creative Disturbance  is to publish multilingually – this is now our 13th language including arabic, french, portuguese, mandarin  and yes english.

Ritwik has indicated that podcasts in numerous different languages spoken in India- oh yes- for the collective memory; Gari in kannada means Feather in English, hence the logo !


we look forward to developing new ways for trans-linguistic art science collaboration !


roger malina


Hosted by Jayant Kaikini , Produced by Ritwik Kaikini

ಇದೊಂದು ಕ್ರಿಯಾಶೀಲ ಮನಸ್ಸುಗಳ ಮುಕ್ತ ಮಾತುಕತೆಯ ಆವರಣ. ಕಲೆ, ಕಾವ್ಯ, ಸಂಗೀತ, ಸಿನೆಮಾ, ಕೃಷಿ, ರಂಗಭೂಮಿ, ವಿಜ್ಞಾನ…
ಇತ್ಯಾದಿ ಮಾಧ್ಯಮಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಹೊಸ ಮಾನವೀಯ ವಿವೇಕಕ್ಕಾಗಿ,
ಕೌಶಲಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಚಡಪಡಿಸುವ
ವಿವಿಧ ಮನಸ್ಸುಗಳ ಸಂಯುಕ್ತ ವಿಕಾಸಶೀಲ ಅಂಗಣ.
ಅವ್ಯಕ್ತವನ್ನು ಉದ್ದೀಪಿಸುವ ವ್ಯಕ್ತ,
ಅಶ್ರಾವ್ಯವನ್ನು ಉದ್ದೀಪಿಸುವ ಶ್ರಾವ್ಯ,
ಅದೃಶ್ಯವನ್ನು ಉದ್ದೀಪಿಸುವ ದೃಶ್ಯ..
ಇವೆಲ್ಲವುಗಳ ಪರಸ್ಪರ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಪ್ರತಿಫಲನ.
ಬಿಡಿಯ ಮೂಲಕ ಇಡಿಯ ಕಡೆಗೆ
ಆಕಾರದ ಮೂಲಕ ನಿರಾಕಾರದ ಕಡೆಗೆ
ಸಹಜವಾಗಿ ಸರಳವಾಗಿ ನಮ್ಮ ಸಹಯಾನ.
ನಡೆದಷ್ಟೂ ದಾರಿ..
ನುಡಿದಷ್ಟೂ ಮೌನ…
ಜಯಂತ ಕಾಯ್ಕಿಣಿ

Gari is an audio space of multilingual sensibility and unique Indian plurality in terms of music, art, sound, poetry, cinema, writing, science methodology, folk and theater. Listen to reflections, conversations, probes and introspections to understand the creative osmosis between multiple pathways of expressing to the world. In art, the said invokes the unsaid, heard invokes the unheard and seen invokes the unseen. In ‘Gari’, we intend to evoke all the three by intimate interactions with special minds from different fields. The channel is hosted by Jayant Kaikini, a writer based in India and produced by his son Ritwik Kaikini. We will be having podcasts in many Indian languages(Kannada, Konkani and more)

here is the first podcast 


Duniya Soori, the acclaimed movie director, in conversation with Jayant Kaikini. From strokes of paint on advertisement boards to directing and producing full fledged movies that drew influence from his life experiences, Soori speaks about interesting insights and the lessons he’s learnt over the years, behind the paintbrush and the camera along with his crew and his own life. His latest venture ‘Tagaru‘ deals with urban terror and the vulnerable common man. Stay tuned for part 2 of the conversation. (The podcast is spoken in Kannada, the language of Karnataka,India)

Bumpers by Charan Raj,a blossoming music director in the Indian film Industry. Channel Artwork by Srajana Kaikini
Gari(ಗರಿ) is an Indian multilingual podcast initiative produced and directed by Ritwik Kaikini.

roger malina

Call to Art Sci Tech Graduate Students; Call for proposals for funded attendance at Sackler Conference Creativity and Collaboration: Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity


from roger malina, member organising committee,Sackler Conference
Creativity and Collaboration: Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity

re PhD student conference: funding available for 60 north american graduate students




Call for participation: National Academy of Sciences Sackler Student Fellows
Symposium, March 12, 2018, Washington D.C.
//// Role/Play: Collaborative Creativity and Creative Collaborations
Scientists thinking like artists—artists thinking like scientists. When these traditionally defined roles mix together, how is the process of making work or conducting research altered? Does the play between disciplines benefit a designer’s practice, an engineer’s output, or a scientist’s data? What are the hazards and opportunities?
We seek proposals from graduate students in multiple fields and disciplines including art, engineering, medicine, biology, ecology, design, computer science, human-computer interaction, and many others. Graduate students who are working with hybrid approaches to these disciplines—whether individually or as part of a collaboration—should submit a 150-word abstract to propose either a 15-minute talk, a 6-minute presentation, or a piece for a poster session/creative exhibition which will make up a large part of the content for this symposium.
big-data … wearables … ubiquitous computing … navigation … education … medical practice … health … serious games … information design … ontologies … cyborgs … actor network theory … new materialism … neuroscience … ethnography … artificial intelligence … textiles … robotics … product design … interface design … biological systems … sustainability … tactical media … cognition … mapping … genetics … bio art … sci-art … visualization … molecular modeling … quantified self … smart homes … surveillance … public policy … human-centered design … privacy … generative art/design … cybernetics … information visualization … data journalism … interaction … immersive experiences … integration … social media … citizen science
Supported by the Sackler Foundation and Google
North American graduate students enrolled in masters and doctoral programs across all disciplines
Monday, March 12, 2018: Student Fellows Symposium
Tuesday, March 13, 2018: Sackler Colloquium Day 1
Wednesday, March 14, 2018: Sackler Colloquium Day 2
November 15, 2017
– We will select 50–60 graduate students to
participate in the symposium
– Students can apply to give a 15-minute talk, a
6-minute talk, or participate in a poster session/
creative exhibition
– Selected students will be considered for travel
stipends depending on distance traveled
– All selected students will receive free registration for all three days of events, including dinners on Sunday and Monday, plus three lunches
– Selected students are expected to fully attend all three days of events
We will finalize student selections and stipends
by December 1, 2017.


The international controversies around the proliferating PhDs in Art and Design

As you will know PhDs in Art and Design are proliferating around the planet
with vary largely varying approaches- and there is much debate around
the rigor that is not always being used in the variety of programs
the editors for this 3 year Leonardo project are Ken Friedman and Jack Ox
they bring to our attention the first articles now available- with a call
for proposals for articles
within the STEAM to STEM discussion a core issue is the very different
research and teaching techniques used in STEM as compared with Arts,
Design and Humanities.
Ken and Jack also in an introductory text overview the debates that are
ongoing and the serious issues
here is their announcement
Roger Malina

Dear Colleagues:

The MIT Press journal Leonardo has just published the first three articles in its three-year symposium on the PhD in art and design.

The articles are

Friedman, Ken, & Jack Ox. 2017. “PhD in Art & Design.” LEONARDO, Vol. 50, No. 5, pp. 515–519, 2017. doi:10.1162/LEON_e_01472

Maksymowicz, Virginia, & Blaise Tobia. 2017. “An Alternative Approach to Establishing a Studio Doctorate in Fine Art.” LEONARDO, Vol. 50, No. 5, pp. 520–525, 2017. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_01189

Zeeuw, Diane. 2017. “Case Study The Development and Evolution of the Creative Arts Practice-led PhD at the University of Melbourne, Victorian College of the Arts.” LEONARDO, Vol. 50, No. 5, pp. 526–527, 2017. doi:10.1162/LEON_a_01407

You may download copies of all three from this URL:

Please let us know if you have ideas or articles to contribute.

Ken Friedman and Jack Ox

Corresponding Editor: Jack Ox <>