Read the latest spotlight about Mementorium over at the Festival of International Virtual and Augmented Reality Stories. Mementorium was selected to be part of FIVARS in Fall 2021. It was an honour to be chosen for the festival and to have the work shown in Los Angeles.
Paré, D. (2021). “A Critical Review and New Directions for Queering Computing and Computing Education.” In George Noblit (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.ORE_EDU-01524.R1
Access the Final Print on the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education:
Technological imaginaries underpinning computing and technoscientific practices and pedagogies are predominantly entrenched in cisheteropatriarchal, imperialist, and militaristic ideologies. A critical, intersectional queer and trans phenomenological analysis of computing education offers an epistemological and axiological reimagining by centering the analysis of gender and sexuality through the lens of marginalized people’s experiences (queer, trans, and intersecting marginalities). It analyzes how systems of domination and liberation occur through relationships between objects, people, and their environments and how these systems of power multiply in effect when people are situated at multiple axes of oppression (such as gender, sexuality, race, and disability).
Complexity, heterogeneity, and fluidity are at the core of queer and trans imaginaries and challenge the assumed naturalness of biological categories that underpin much of the cisheteronormative harm and violence in K-16 education, STEM (science, technological, engineering and medical) disciplinary practices, and technological innovations. Foregrounding complexity, heterogeneity, and fluidity supports the critique, construction, and transformation of computational objects, worlds, and learning environments so that queer and trans perspectives, narratives, and experiences are centered and valued. In doing so, ambiguity, fluidity, and body becoming are centered in virtual spaces, thereby offering emancipatory possibilities for supporting critical literacies of gender and sexuality. Methodologically, approaches rooted in active solidarity with queer and trans people and a commitment to listening to intersectional experiences of gender and sexuality-based marginalization and resilience reorient computing learning environments towards liberatory, justice-oriented practices.
Computing scholars and educators have identified data science (more broadly) and algorithmic bias (in particular) as an essential domain for furthering education research and practice. Histories of erasure, exclusion, and violence on queer and trans people, both by carceral technologies and algorithmic bias, and as part of the computing profession, are enacted on individual people and reflected in societal biases that inform and shape public experiences of computing and technologies. Overall, queering computing education and computing education research directs attention towards a multifaceted problem: the historical and ongoing hegemonic, cisheteropatriarchal control over programming; the limitations to representation by code that a computer can recognize; the possibilities to queer code and computer architectures; the technological regulation of identity and bodies; and the limits and affordances of technological representation of gender and sexual identity. A queer, trans, intersectional, justice-oriented approach to computing education attends to the structural, socio-historical context in teaching and learning computer science and coding, including the dominant cultures of the technology workforce and the everyday disciplining interactions with technology that shape who we can become.
Paré, D., Shanahan, M-C. & Sengupta, P. (2020). Queering Complexity Using Multi-Agent Simulations. In M. Gresalfi & L. Horn (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity in the Learning Sciences, 14th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), (pp. 1397-1404). London: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340902907_Queering_Complexity_Using_Multi-Agent_Simulations. Nominated for Best Student Paper at the 2020 International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
The paper proceedings from the 2020 International Conference of the Learning Sciences were released some months ago, but I’m just catching up with this longer blog posting now. Our paper, Queering Complexity Using Multi-Agent Simulations, was nominated for Best Student Paper which is a great honour.
I am a long-time activist-scholar, and when I began my Ph.D. it was with the intention to design and research better ways to engage people in learning about gender and sexuality. When I first began working with my advisor, Dr. Pratim Sengupta, and learned that he and Dr. Marie-Claire Shanahan did public computing research on the giant touch screen computers in the hallway of the Education building at the University, I thought, “Before I finish my Ph.D., I am going to make something queer to put in that space.” The other part of that thought was that my design was not going to be something queer that was easily digestible or a “nice” celebrationTM. This is known in the literature as homonormativity, a framing of queerness within heterosexual ideals so as not to be “threatening” to the normative frameworks of heterosexuality.
Fast forward about a year and a half later, and one virtual reality prototype, a funded documentary film + 360° film, and the Queering VR Chapter nearing publication, plus some conferences, speaking/exhibition engagements – it’s kind of a blur…
I never stopped brewing the idea of queering the boids simulation over that year and a bit, but in March of 2019 I finally took two weeks to hammer out a basic prototype that informed the initial design during our Leighton Studio Artist Residency at the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity in April 2019, and was then used was in co-design sessions, two of which are preliminarily analyzed in this paper.
This paper proceeding, Queering Complexity Using Multi-Agent Simulations, is just the beginning and the expanded paper will be able to show cases and an extended analysis. For now, I hope you enjoy and feel free to check out the Flocking QT Stories simulation, which is now online at
In this paper, we demonstrate how multi-agent simulations of gender and sexuality-based marginalization can help us understand gender and sexual experiences as complex, emergent, multi-level phenomena, which involve dynamic interactions between individuals, groups and institutions. We present Flocking QT Stories, a multiagent-based simulation that illustrates how structural (macro-level) phenomena such as gender and sexuality-based marginalization and resilience can manifest through individual-level interactions between computational agents. We then present illustrative cases from an ongoing co-design study with people with lived or professional scholarly experience of gender and sexuality-based marginalization. Our analysis reveals how participants interacted with Flocking QT Stories through turning (Ahmed, 2006) their attention toward marginalized agents, and engaging in multi-level reasoning (Hostetler, Sengupta & Hollett, 2018; Wilensky & Resnick, 1999) to make sense of the audio stories embedded in the simulation as well as the macro-level, emergent behaviors resulting from interactions between individuals (boids), and between individuals and institutions.
From the Canada Media Fund blog, check out the latest write-up of my research and design work as part of my PhD at the University of Calgary, Werklund School of Education on multiplayer, social virtual reality for learning about gender and sexuality. Thanks to my collaborators on this project: Scout Windsor, John Craig, and Pratim Sengupta.
This project started at the beginning of 2018 and we all learned so much from the design process as well as from showing it to people at various science, technology, and arts events.
We were fairly new to VR design at the time, and wanted to challenge ourselves to design everything ourselves. The design is grounded in the Learning Sciences. All assets were made in VR using Medium and some Google Tilt Brush, and we programmed the multiplayer from scratch.
It was a steep learning curve, but we pulled it together in 4 months around school and jobs. Things we thought would be easy, were hard. Things we thought would be hard, were really hard. lol I’m super proud of our team!
I had a great time presenting in virtual reality for the 2020 Educators in VR International Summit. Despite being worried about potential technical problems and my typical nervousness before any presentation, it was a great experience! I actually did have my headset malfunction right before going in and had to restart my computer! But despite the challenges, it was awesome to have the opportunity to present to a public audience about the research and design work my team and I have been doing.
Most of all, I appreciated the discussion with audience members where I got to hear about what resonated with people and what challenged them to think about issues in a new light. Presenting in a public space that was not ticketed and could be accessed by people through VR or desktop and with an internet connection has the potential to engage with publicness in research and design in new ways.
One difficult side to this publicness is that you can have people who are only there to be trolls. Publicness brings with it challenges regarding who has access and under what behavioural expectations. If we allow for all behaviours, even violent comments, we make the space inaccessible for those who are targets of the violent, harmful, or disruptive behaviour. This is why public, social VR needs moderation and behavioural expectations. For example, I had one person who appeared to be trying to give me the finger from the front row. Jokes on them because their avatar didn’t allow this. But jokes aside, this can be a real problem. In this case, it was mildly distracting for me. I’m pretty experienced at presenting to a wide range of audiences, so I’m fairly good at dealing with distracting behaviours, including a little bit of hostility. But this might not be the case for everyone, and it might not be the case for audience members.
The organizers for Educators in VR did a phenomenal job of preparing for these kinds of situations. They had a host at every session who introduced the speaker, moderated questions, and removed people from the room who were obviously being disruptive. This allowed speakers to focus on their presentations and meaningfully engage with audience members. I’m very thankful for the moderators because I had a really great time talking with the audience members of all ages. They had many insightful questions and thoughts about social VR, identity representation, and the future of VR.
Another challenge to publicness is the question of who has access to the technology. I was presenting in AltspaceVR which, as stated above, can be accessed using VR or a desktop and and internet connection. When we make claims about increasing access through remote access or telepresence, we need to consider who has the tools. Not everybody has access to home internet or a home computer. I am a fan of public libraries, museums, and educational spaces (universities, colleges, schools) as sites for public technology that could support better access for all. For all of us who work in technology, we need to consider how we can support these spaces to increase public access to technology. In other words, fund and partner with public spaces! At the University of Calgary lab I work with, the Mind, Matter and Media Lab (m3lab.org), researchers Dr. Marie-Claire Shanahan and Dr. Pratim Sengupta have been working with the concept of public computing as “public sidewalks” (Check out their TEDx talk). Working with Marie-Claire and Pratim has inspired me to take up publicness in my own work as well and to consider the limits to publicness in order to work towards increased public access to meaningful technological interaction. Technology has the power to connect us, but only if we design for meaningful, accessible, and inclusive connections.
On another note, I really appreciated how presenting in virtual reality meant that I could connect with people worldwide (or at least in time zones where people were awake) without having to travel. I love travelling and I’ve had the privilege to see many neat places in the world while traveling for conferences, but it has its downsides. I find airports stressful. I hate trying to make connecting flights. It’s hard to not get sick when travelling, and hotels become a bit boring after a while. (It’s also difficult to stay in hotels when you have scent-induced asthma). But beyond my personal challenges, air travel is very carbon intensive and I am concerned about how much I contribute to global warming. Of course, VR conferences will not eliminate our contributions to global warming because we have to consider the environmental costs of the data centres and technological equipment required to participate in a VR-connected world. I don’t know what the figures are on these environmental costs and how they compare to air travel, but I hope this information becomes more public as we consider how to better connect people globally while managing our collective environmental footprint. Virtual reality conferencing may be a good option and I’m thankful to have been a part of the first Educators in VR International Summit so that I could see first-hand what this future might look like.
Slideshow of Presentation
Here’s some of my slides from my presentation where I talked about the last 4 projects of research and design work in VR that I’ve been doing since about 2017. Shout out to my amazing collaborators with whom I’ve worked with in different combinations across these projects: Scout Windsor, John Craig, Pratim Sengupta, Sophia Marlow, and Matthew Thompson.
Now online: Critical, Transdisciplinary and Embodied Approaches in STEM Education. Our chapter, “Queering Virtual Reality: A Prolegomenon”, by Dylan Paré, Pratim Sengupta, Scout Windsor, John Craig, and Matthew Thompson, is now available from Springer: https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783030294885
Queering Virtual Reality explores how VR can support critical literacies of gender and sexuality.
Although the VR applications used in this study have changed or have been discontinued, the research findings have important broader implications for the design of multiplayer, social VR and avatar creation tools.
The findings demonstrate how STEM innovations (VR & 3D sculpting) can be leveraged to support productive and playful experiences of inquiry about gender and sexuality that can help address LGBTQ+ marginalizations.
We also show how queer and trans encounters with technology can move us away from reifying domains of knowledge, such as STEM, towards questions of who we were, who we are, and who we can become.
This was the first research I did in my PhD and I’m excited to eventually share later research that grew out of the initial seeds planted during these first design conversations.
Most of all, I’m thankful for my collaborators/friends who were willing to jump in, explore VR, and do this research and design work with me. I’m also very thankful to the editors, Pratim Sengupta, Marie-Claire Shanahan, and Beaumie Kim, whose hard work made this book possible.
I highly recommend checking out the many fantastic chapters that show how STEM education can be re-imagined through critical approaches.
You must be logged in to post a comment.