Antibiotic-Responsive Bioart: Exploring DIYbio as a Design Studio Practice Stacey Kuznetsov1, Cassandra Barrett2, Piyum Fernando1, Kat Fowler3 1School of Arts, Media, and 2School of Biological and Health 3Center for Biology and Engineering Systems Engineering Society Arizona State University Arizona State University Arizona State University {kstace, pfernan4}@asu.edu [email protected] [email protected]

Figure 1. From left to right: microbial art projects growing in our low-cost DIY incubator; a close-up of antibiotics and bacteria streaked onto a petri dish by a student; a student screenprinting an image of their bioart; and screenprinted bioart artifacts. ABSTRACT participation in biology outside of professional laboratory Our work links hybrid practices from biology, fine arts, settings. Adopting the language of computation [17] and and design in a studio setting to support materially-oriented the practices of other DIY movements [78] DIYbio focuses engagement with biotechnology. Using autoethnographic on open-sourcing, hacking, and creatively tinkering with methods, we present our two-year process of converting an biology in informal learning environments such as HCI studio into a BSL-1 (biosafety level 1) facility, our makersapces, art studios, and personal homes. Over the iterative development of low-cost tools, and our own self- past few years, HCI research has engaged with this reflexive experimentation with (DIY)bio protocols. movement, by, for instance, contextualizing international Insights from this work led us to design a weeklong bioart DIYbio communities and practices within the broader course, whereby junior highschool students creatively maker culture [45, 48], as well as studying DIYbio tools as “painted” with bacteria and antibiotic substances, digitally boundary objects that coalesce practitioners with diverse designed stencils from the resulting petri dish images, and interests and expertise [38]. More broadly, DIYbio is screenprinted them onto physical artifacts. Our findings aligned with a growing body of HCI work that interfaces reveal the nuances of working with biological, analog, and humans with biology through smart materials, bio- digital materials in a design studio setting. We conclude by electronic displays, computational biology visualizations, reflecting on DIYbio studio as a gathering of diverse actors or biotic games, to name a few [39, 41, 69, 73, and others]. who work with hybrid materials to give physical form to matters of concern. For the most part, Human Biology Interaction (HBI) systems and smart biomaterials are being developed in Author Keywords collaboration with professional biologists, often in Design studio, DIYbio, bioart professional laboratory settings. In parallel, new trends in INTRODUCTION critical art, bioart, and speculative design [15, 16, 24, 80] DIYbio (Do It Yourself Biology) is a nascent movement draw on materially-oriented inquiry to critically engage within the broader maker culture, aimed at enabling public with issues. Motivated by these developments, our research asks, How can studio work incorporate practices from Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are microbiology, digital design, and the fine arts to explore not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies complex issues; and what new possibilities and challenges bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for emerge from integrating these disparate practices? To components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. answer these questions, we set up a DIYbio design studio Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission as a hybrid space that supports hands-on work with digital, and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]. organic, and analog materials to engage with biotech CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montreal, QC, Canada issues. We orient DIYbio studio practice as a gathering of © 2018 Association for Computing Machinery. people, materials, and practices, which gives physical form ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-5620-6/18/04 $15.00 https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174037 to matters of concern [Latour, 2005; DiSalvo, et al. 2014]. Research contributions Bio-electronic systems This paper details our autoethnographic process of setting A growing body of HCI work is incorporating living up a BSL-1 (biosafety level 1) certified interaction design organisms as inputs and outputs into digital technologies to studio, our iterative work with DIYbio protocols, and our comprise larger bio-electronic systems. Examples range development of low-cost DIYbio tools (Fig. 1). Insights from hybrid artistic installations that bridge biology and from our self-reflexive practice inspired us to develop a computation [74], to insect-controlled robots [31], biotic bioart studio course, which combines hands-on DIYbio games that mediate player interactions with bacteria [41], work with techniques from digital design and the fine arts. as well as low-cost kits that interface plants with digital The week-long course was piloted with junior highschool sensors and social broadcasting capabilities [25]. Plant students who creatively “painted” on petri dishes with growth has been a particularly popular output for many bacteria and antibiotic substances, digitally designed digital systems that represent information such as people’s stencils from the resulting bacterial images, and interaction with their friends [43] or recycling behavior in screenprinted them onto physical artifacts. Findings from public places [37]. Similarly, our work intersects digital our research contribute practical and generalizable technologies with living systems, both in our development considerations for safely incorporating biology into HCI of low-cost DIYbio tools, and in our bioart course whereby studio practice, as well as deeper opportunities for biology- graphic software and digital fabrication is used alongside themed studio work. We conclude by discussing two microbial art. implication areas for HCI: 1) expanding design studio Biology-themed STEAM initiatives for children practices to include materially-oriented work in (DIY)bio; Not unlike other STEAM [8] initiatives that incorporate the 2) implementing studio-based DIYbio initiatives to support arts into engineering fields, we focus on bioart as a creative broader reflection on science. entry point for youth science practice. DIYbio kits for We continue by reviewing general trends in biology- testing and analyzing DNA [60, 61]), already already themed HCI research and draw on design studio culture support amateur wet-lab work outside of professional labs, literature to make a case for incorporating (DIY)biology similar to hardware platforms such as the Arduino or into studio practice. We then present our own process of Raspberry Pi, which have revolutionized STEM education establishing and sustaining DIYbio work within a design and public participation in electronics. However, most studio to set the stage for our bioart studio curriculum. We DIYbio platforms focus on relatively advanced protocols detail the course rationale and activities, and present key (e.g., extracting DNA and performing PCR), while we insights from piloting it with junior highschool students. focus on novice-friendly microbiology activities that can We conclude by reflecting on the challenges and be accessible to youths without much specialized opportunities of working with (DIY)bio materials in a knowledge or equipment. studio setting, and suggest that DIYbio studio inquiry can Alongside open source DIYbio platforms, new HCI bio- support public engagement with scientific issues. electronic systems have enabled children to explore BIOLOGY AND HCI bacterial response to light [51] and interact with biological The CHI community has been exploring a range of Human systems through a microscope and touchscreen [52]. Other Biology Interaction [51] initiatives, including: fabrication systems have focused on biodesign for children, by, for techniques for smart materials, the development of instance, developing games to “engineer” virtual bacteria systems, and biology education tools. en vitro [53, 54], or embedding tangible tokens into laboratory equipment to simulate synthetic biology Smart materials Biology-informed HCI research is developing new protocols in museums [59]. In addition, work has explored responsive biomaterials, including: “organic primitives”, children’s attitudes towards living systems by deploying a which respond to pH levels by changing their color, odor mushroom display that grows according to the amount of and shape [39], natto cells used as nanoactuators in time children spend using learning applications [29]. It is response to humidity [79], color-changing powders that worth noting that in all of these systems, technology respond to harmful levels of ozone, UV, and carbon mediates children’s interactions with biological systems, rather than enabling children to manipulate the living monoxide [40], or material-based interaction design of organisms directly. foods that change shape and texture [77]. Despite these developments, recent literature has pointed out that DESIGN STUDIO CULTURE AND DIYBIO manipulating biomaterials still remains challenging for These trends in biology-themed HCI, which include smart interaction designers [39]. New platforms such as xPrint, a materials, bioelectronics systems, and STEAM initiatives, deposition printer for smart biomaterials [76], address suggest that a need for supporting hands-on biology work some of these challenges by streamlining the fabrication in HCI contexts. To envision how such work might take process. Our research contributes to this work by place in HCI labs, we turn to design studio culture, which developing a relatively easy, low-cost, and creative process has a rich history of incorporating a variety of media into for engaging novices with biosensing of antibiotics—a materially-oriented inquiry [66]. Alongside its emphasis on previously unexplored area in HCI. access to diverse materials, design studio practice also examine DIYbio as a studio practice. Our first step was to embraces frequent iteration, a culture of open sharing and establish a space and infrastructure that supports work with feedback, and engagement with heterogeneous issues hybrid materials and enables practitioners to seamlessly throughout the design process as key aspects of studio incorporate biological organisms, digital electronics, and practice [5, 42, 66]. HCI scholarship has argued for traditional HCI fabrication tools into their projects. This incorporating these aspects of industrial design, fine arts, section details our two-year autoethnographic study, and architecture studios into HCI research and practice [6, whereby we detail how we converted our HCI lab studio 14 33]. Design studio has been integrated into HCI both in into a BSL-1 (biosafety level 1) studio and developed low- terms of pedagogical paradigms [5, 46, 75] and new cost DIYbio tools to support creative biology work. methodologies where material inquiry generates new Autoethnographic design methods knowledge [26, 28, 63, 64, and others]. We set out to We set out to understand how DIYbio might take root in develop a BLS-1 workspace that would function closer to a design studio settings, specifically in terms of developing design studio than a professional biology lab and motivate safe, feasible, and creative DIYbio activities and designing creative and self-reflexive prototyping with hybrid tools to support this practice. Our team of biologists, materials. Our approach is aligned with both pedagogy— interaction designers, and engineers applied by supporting collaborative learning of bioart concepts, autoethnographic study methods [56, 57] by incorporating and design research—by materializing issues. Our studio our own experiences as part the design process. also offers an alternative perspective: working with living Autoethnographic design is “design research drawn from systems shifts agency in the design process and also extensive, genuine use by those creating or building the hinders the blending of certain practices (we return to this system” [57]. This is a valuable design method when there in the discussion). are no current use cases, and is especially appropriate for Our own work with (DIY) biology protocols, as well as our work, which is bootstraping a DIYbio community and studio course principles such as open-ended assignments practice that does not yet exist in our city. The method also and informal feedback [e.g., 5, 6, 66] led us to develop a has many other advantages as it allows quick iteration on bioart studio curriculum for children. To incorporate prototypes before deploying them to external users. hands-on work with organic materials into children’s In accordance with autoethnographic design methods, we studio practice, we leveraged Eisenberg’s discussion of worked on hands-on biology projects using our space and expressive smart materials in informal learning activities tools concurrently with the iterative lab set-up and tool [35]. Eisenberg suggests that “perhaps a more compelling development. We focused on five basic microbiology way of thinking about new materials, however, is not to protocols: autoclaving procedures to sterilize lab imagine them in the role of didactic classroom devices, but equipment, aseptic (sterile) lab technique to streak plates instead to think of them as integrated within the sorts of and culture bacteria, yogurt fermentation, microscopy (e.g., activities that have always captivated children” [ibid]. creating wet-mount and gram-stained microscope slides), In accordance with this view, our BSL-1 studio and design and the Kirby Bauer assay to test for antibiotic properties studio methods enabled us to integrate familiar craft (discussed in detail on page 5). We chose to focus on these activities—sketching, drawing, printmaking—with activities because they are safe and feasible: they are microbiology protocols and wetlab work. The resulting widely practiced in high school biology classes and for the artifacts are reminiscent of Ascott’s concept of most part, did not require too many specialized tools. Moistmedia, which consists of “bits, atoms, neurons, and These activities also cover a spectrum of biology work and genes” [2]. Our work explores this idea by incorporating can potentially accommodate many future creative fine arts methods, digital fabrication techniques and wetlab community projects in ecology, bioart, or food science. experiments into the creation of physical bioart artifacts. Data collection and analysis. Our team consisted of 4 INCORPORATING DIYBIO INTO STUDIO PRACTICE individuals from different academic disciplines: We formed an interdisciplinary team of collaborators with Engineering(P1), HCI(P2), Synthetic biology(P3), and expertise in biology, engineering, and design, and set out to Molecular biology(P4). We documented our team’s experience by audio and video recording each work session. In between the group work sessions, all researchers also iterated on the protocols independently and documented their practice using our internal Google document, which served as a shared lab notebook. We reviewed our own experiences and documentation during weekly meetings over the course of four semesters. In addition to practicing these protocols internally, we also held 2 public workshops where we practiced the Kirby Bauer antibiotic test and the yogurt and gram staining Figure 2. Setting up our BSL-1 certified design studio and developing a low-cost incubator from scratch. activities with local adult non-biologist makers who were press, a vinyl cutter, a textiles and fabrics work area, and a interested in DIYbio. These workshops were audio- range of craft materials including paints, post-its, foamcore recorded as well and open coding was applied to the boards, markers, paints, etc. Our studio and bio lab is also transcripts. The codes were grouped to reveal emergent physically connected to a larger electronics fabrication lab, themes, with a special focus on challenges, so that aspects a hardware and woodworking shop, and a blackbox theatre. of our tools, lab set-up and the activity procedures could be This layout enables hands-on work with different materials improved. Together, the data from our group and and practice-based inquiry where collaborators learn by individual DIYbio work informed the design of our low- observing and doing. Over the past two years, this flexible cost tools, and helped us refine our lab set-up and iterate on space has supported creative ideation, rapid prototyping, our DIYbio experiment procedures. Themes in the data and iterative feedback amongst computer scientists, also led us to reflect on the broader implications of the interaction designers, biologists, and humanities scholars DIYbio activities we were exploring. across a number of projects [36]. Setting up a BSL-1 facility in our HCI studio Acquiring and developing tools We set out to establish a BSL-1 (Biosafety Level 1) facility By practicing DIYbio activities ourselves and within our interaction design studio. A BSL-1 facility systematically reviewing our experiences, we have been supports work with minimally-risky procedures and able to identify and iterate on the required tools. As much materials [18], and on the face of it, does not require major as we could, we appropriated everyday materials for modifications to a standard DIY fabrication space. Some biology purposes, by for instance, using a pressure cooker practices such as access to running water or personal as an autoclave, toothpicks to streak plates, bleach to hygiene requirements (e.g., no eating) were already in handle spills, and eye droppers for pipetting. In some place in our studio. However, we had to make several cases, we built tools from scratch such as laser cutting our adaptations to our space to accommodate biology work, own test tube racks, 3D printing a dremel attachment for particularly in terms of developing infrastructure for our centrifuge, developing a low-cost, precise incubator, biological material storage and waste disposal, personal and hacking together a servo-based shaker for aerating protective equipment, and procedures for handling liquid media. Finally, some materials— bacterial colonies, biological contamination and spills. Working with our gram staining dyes, petri dishes, agar—had to be purchased university’s Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), we from professional distributors. iterated on our set-up and workflow to meet the BSL-1 Autoethnographic design of a DIYbio incubator from scratch requirements, including: One tool that deserves a particular discussion is the DIYbio • adding non-porous (vinyl) covers to all biology work incubator we developed from scratch (Fig. 2). From the surfaces; onset, it was clear to us that a precise incubator was needed • setting up biohazards waste bins for biological materials to perform most of the DIY microbiology activities we and sharps; envisioned. In contrast to other DIY solutions available • coordinating waste pickup requests with our University’s online, we wanted to build an incubator with a high Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) department; precision temperature control that could be operated by • conducting biosafety training with all lab members; anyone on our team, regardless of their programming or engineering background. Our goal was thus to build a piece • developing a spills handling procedure and acquiring proper disinfectants and cleaning reagents; of equipment (not an early prototype) that would 1) reliably serve our experiments over the course of the Since obtaining our BSL-1 certification, the DIYbio coming years; 2) could be used by non-experts; and 3) be portion of our space has also been outfitted with replicated in other labs with only low-cost, simple professional and DIY biology equipment including gas materials and popular off-the-shelf components. burners for working aseptically, hotplates, microscopes, and safety equipment (gloves, goggles, fire extinguisher.). We iterated on several form factors and control circuits over our two-year study, and feedback from the non- Supporting studio practice. While meeting the above engineers on our team was particularly useful for the BSL-1 requirements, we wanted to ensure that our space interface design. Our current system uses a general- retained its use as a design studio, albeit with a dedicated purpose incandescent light bulb as the heating element, DIYbio work area. It is worth highlighting several features Styrofoam box as the insulation material, and an Arduino of our space here, particularly because we believe that our Uno development board with some basic electronic overall layout facilitates rich studio-style interactions with components. To achieve temperature accuracy we built a different (bio) materials. In accordance with design studio custom electronic circuit to precisely control the AC culture, our DIYbio work area is part of a larger space that voltage supplied to the heating bulb. This circuit consists has an open floor plan, a large collaborative work area, of two optically isolated sub circuits—Zero-Crossing several private meeting rooms. The space also hosts a detector and AC trigger circuit with a Triac. A K-type range of other fabrication tools, including a screenprinting thermocouple combined with Adafruit MAX31855K amplifier was used as the temperature sensor. In the interaction design more broadly. On one hand, our work firmware we used the Arduino PID library, and the revealed instances of knowledge sharing across domains parameters were tuned manually to calibrate alongside an and pushed us (the researchers) to explore issues beyond external thermometer and achieve accuracy up to +/-0.25C. our academic disciplines. The engineers and designers An intuitive user interface was implemented using a 32 gained knowledge of basic biology protocols, as well as a character LCD and 4 touch switches, enabling basic deeper understanding the slow, delicate and irreversible interactions such as setting target temperature without nature of biology experiments. These attributes were having to program the Arduino. different from the faster and more easily-reversible work in the digital domain and influenced the design of our Autoethnographic reflection Outside of academia, there are two major DIYbio incubator—as in, for instance, the design of a custom AC communities in the USA, Genspace [27] and Biocurious phase control circuit to ensure precise operation for a [9] both of which rely on professional biologists and longer period without harming delicate bio processes. operate using the makerspace model. As far as we know, Meanwhile, the biologists on our team learned aspects of we are the first university-based HCI studio to have a fully- electronics and fabrication methods including safer functional BSL-1 set-up, whereby designers, artists, operation of tools, working principles and their limitations. biologists, and members of the general public can safely Our collective experience also revealed unique work on DIYbio projects. While many HCI researchers are multidisciplinary opportunities, such as using organisms as collaborating with biologists, most of their wetlab work bioindicators for harmful substances, creating non-living physical artifacts from ephemeral living systems, and takes place in professional labs. Our space enables applying DIY biology in citizen science initiatives to designers to work with biology in a studio setting, which presents its own unique opportunities and challenges. further public understanding of microbiology. ANTIBIOTIC-RESPONSIVE BIOART Reflecting on our entire process of setting up a lab and Insights from our autoethnographic work inspired us to infrastructure for working with biology within the context develop a program that would seamlessly integrate the of HCI, we offer three insights to the CHI community. biology protocols we have been iterating on along with First and foremost, establishing a BSL-1 design studio is more traditional art practices that were supported by our not particularly hard or expensive. Our overall set-up, design studio. Drawing on existing STEAM (stem +art) including all tools, basic reagents and media, safety initiatives, which support non-expert engagement with infrastructure, and protective equipment cost less than both art and science, we wanted to develop a set of 2,000$, which is on par with or lower than the cost of most activities that are rooted in concepts from microbiology HCI studio set-ups. The BLS-1 training and certification while supporting flexible experimental design and creative process, while somewhat lengthy and bureaucratic, was not making. We also wanted the activities to have a longer- particularly difficult and did require advanced biology lasting creative output would be safe for participants to expertise beyond what could be easily found in basic take home (i.e., non bio-hazardous). During our textbooks and across DIYbio forums (our University’s IBC autoethnographic work, we examined a range of DIYbio also advised us and offered additional guidance). protocols across microscopy, fermentation, and aseptic lab However, while the set-up itself was not difficult, we technique, and were ultimately drawn to the Kirby Bauer discovered that work with living materials involves special test (detailed below) and approaches for creating physical, planning and care, and differs from workflows with non-living representations of “microbial art”. traditional HCI materials. For instance, the temperature Background and time requirements for growing bacteria (24-48 hours), along with autoclaving media and equipment before and The Kirby Bauer test and microbial art after the work, required longer-term planning. We often The Kirby Bauer (KB) protocol is a standard procedure for scheduled our work sessions on particular days of the analyzing bacterial sensitivity to antibiotic substances [12]. week, e.g., autoclaving and pouring plates on Mondays, Traditionally, the protocol relies on disks containing an streaking bacteria on Tuesdays, and observing results on antibiotic of a known concentration. The disks are placed Wednesdays to leave time for clean-up and waste pickup at onto agar plates that have been uniformly streaked with the end of the week. This presented a very different bacteria, and the antibiotic will diffuse into the agar around timeframe for iterating on our work, and introduced a host the disks. During incubation, bacterial growth is inhibited of new variables to be considered during troubleshooting around each substance that has antibacterial properties. The (e.g., a bacterial colony might grow poorly because of protocol can thus be used to observe antibacterial effects of faulty growth media, contamination during streaking, stress different substances on bacteria, and, by measuring the size incurred in transport to our lab, etc.) of the inhibition zone, determine the minimum concentrations needed to hinder growth. Variations of the Finally, the new considerations arising from our work with KB experiment have been applied to test household microorganisms, analog tools, and digital technologies led disinfectants for antibacterial properties [49, 67]. us to reflect on the integration of (DIY)biology with In the context of HCI research, the KB protocol is a form growth and students were asked to bring in a household of DIY biosensing for antibacterial properties of everyday item to test for antibacterial properties the following day. substances. We decided to integrate this protocol with the Day 2: We observed and discussed the plates that were practice of “microbial art” in order to support creative incubated from day 1. Students then performed a version of engagement with antibacterial testing. Microbial art is a the KB protocol using the household items they brought to long-standing practice whereby pigmented organisms— test for antibacterial properties. Students also combined bacteria, fungi or protists—are streaked onto agar plates to food coloring with liquid agar growth medium and poured create visual patterns. Interestingly, Alexander Fleming, colorful plates as the basis for their final bioart projects. the scientist credited with the discovery of penicillin, Finally, students were introduced to the basics of painted people and nature-scapes using different colored screenprinting and practiced printing a pre-made design. bacteria on petri dishes [23]. In fact, it is rumored that Fleming accidentally discovered penicillin by observing Day 3: Students shared and discussed the antimicrobial the antimicrobial properties of a fungus on one of his properties of their households products based on the KB microbe paintings [ibid]. More recently, biologists and test results from day 2. Students then brainstormed and artists have been creating a range of petri dish paintings [7, sketched ideas for their final bioart project (using regular 50 and others], and the American Society of Microbiology pencils and paper). Using these drawings as guides, has been running an “Agar Art” contest since 2015, with students streaked bacteria and antibiotic substances onto some entries being as elaborate as the recreation of Van the colored petri dishes they poured on day 2. Gogh’s “Starry Night” [1]. Day 4: Observing the bioart projects from day 3, students Bioart artifacts write haikus about their work, which served as entry points Given our interest in DIYbio as a studio practice, we into our conversations about the intersection of art and wanted to develop a process where microbial art could be science. Students were then shown how to convert digital represented through enduring physical artifacts. We drew photographs of their petri dishes into stencils using Adobe inspiration from two related bioart project: Infective Fireworks. Students worked in groups of 3 to design their Textiles [22], whereby naturally occurring bacteria was stencil, which was cut on a vinyl cutter. cultured on fabric stained with antibiotic substances; and Bacterial Textiles [65], whereby microbe art was printed Day 5: Students transferred their vinyl stencils onto onto silk and autoclaved. The idea of combining microbe screenprinting screens and printed their images onto paper, art with textile design led us to explore screenprinting as an fabric, and wood. The class concluded with a general to print antibiotic-responsive bioart on fabrics and other review of the week-long activities, discussions about each materials. Screenprinting is fitting with the culture and printed image, and an informal conversation about the aesthetics for DIYbio, as it is one of the most popular DIY students’ general perceptions of the class. printing methods. In this method of printmaking, ink is Studio set-up and materials transferred through a mesh screen onto an underlying Throughout the week, activities that involved hands-on material. A stencil (vinyl in our case) makes sections of the work with the bacteria (streaking, observing plates, etc.) mesh impermeable to the ink, thereby creating the desired were directly supervised by the instructors. In accordance patterns on the substrate. with BLS-1 requirements, we ensured that all students Bioart class activities wore protective gear (gloves, goggles and labcoats), all With these three starting points—the KB test, microbial working areas were disinfected, and proper hand-washing art, and physical representations of bioart—we developed a was in place after each work session. However, even week-long summer camp module for junior high school during these highly supervised activities, students were youths. The course was piloted as part of an outreach free to choose their streaking tools—inoculating loops, program at our university, which focuses on introducing swabs, or toothpicks—to “paint” with any pigmented children to a breadth of creative digital skills, ranging from bacteria from Carolina Biological Supplies [13], as well as digital music design, to programming for games, and DIY the antibiotic substances they brought from home and two fabrication with makerspace tools (e.g., 3D printing, laser types of antibiotics in our studio (ampicillin powder and cutting). Our module consisted of a 2-hour long work amoxicillin disks). All other activities—discussions, sessions that ran Monday-Friday in our studio as follows: sketching, screenprinting, writing haiku’s, etc.—were structured as traditional design studio activities (Fig. 3). Day 1: After introductions, the students were shown how Students had free access to a range of craft materials such to autoclave lab equipment and growth media with a as pens, and pencils, paper, as well as screenprinting inks pressure cooker. We then demonstrated basic aseptic lab and substrates to print on, including fabrics, wood, and technique and students practiced streaking creative patterns cardstock, and digital fabrication tools (Adobe Fireworks using pigmented bacteria. The class concluded with a on laptops and a vinyl cutter). Our activities with these discussion about factors that promote or inhibit bacterial materials embraced informal learning principles of exploratory play, hands-on experimentation, collaborative Figure 3. Flexible use of our DIYbio studio space: culturing bacteria; preparing growth media; and getting ready to screenprint. interactions with other people—principles that are also students also used the ampicillin powder and a disinfecting being increasingly being associated with studios and cleaning product in our lab. Without prompts from makerspaces in informal learning literature [11, 32, 70]. instructors, several students chose to partition their petri dishes to compare the effects of different substances e.g. “I Data collection and analysis put Neosporin and then toothpaste and then had a control” In informal learning environments, traditional evaluation of science learning (e.g., pre and post tests) may undermine (S1). While setting up their petri dishes, all of the students participants’ confidence or even deter participation [55]. speculated on the outcomes of the experiments without Similar to prior work that analyzes behavior and dialogue prompts form instructors. Predictions about the toothpaste to infer learning patterns [4, 20], our data analysis focuses were particularly divergent, whereby some students on conversations and behavior during our classes. We thought it would actually promote bacterial growth because obtained permission from parents and students to audio of its sweetness: record our classes and take photos and videos. We coded Actually since it has sugar (bacteria will grow better) -S2 transcripts of the class audio, which include conversations I think kids toothpaste will help it grow because kids between researchers and children. We affinity diagramed toothpaste is way sweeter -S5 themes from these conversations and the researchers’ personal notes and photos/videos. In our findings, we All of the students were visibly excited to see their results. reference data owing to students as S1-7, and researchers Those who used Neosporin, handsoap, ampicillin powder, as R1-4. For each section, we include autoethnographic disinfectant, and alcohol wipes expressed a sense of reflections on how studio practice oriented our work. We satisfaction when observing a large zone of inhibition (no continue by first presenting some information about the bacterial growth) around these products. What was most students, as well as the types of materials they wanted to interesting to the class, however, was the fact that this type test for antibiotic properties in our class. We then discuss of biosensing did not have binary results: bacterial growth how the students interacted with hybrid bioart materials was inhibited to different degrees by different products, and engaged with broader scientific concepts. and in some cases resulted in color changes. For instance, one of the soaps caused the bacteria to grow in a darker red FINDINGS pattern, which S4 interpreted to be a sign of stress: “in the 7 students (3 female) enrolled in the class, and of all the place where the soap is its also a much darker red and students, only two have previously taken a middle school stressed out”. The toothpaste outcomes varied, with S1 biology course. The students were unfamiliar with the observing no change, while S2 and S5 noted darker color biology procedures and concepts presented in our course— variations that, being similar to the bacterial response to KB testing, autoclaving, streaking plates, etc.—and had no soap, were interpreted as a sign of stress. In our prior experience with screenprinting. When asked why autoethnographic reflection, we saw these examples of they enrolled in the course on the first day, the students biosensing as instances where interactions between human expressed some interest in biology and saw the class as a and non-human actors generated situated knowledge. way to explore whether or not they would take biology Studio work with biomaterials (‘non-human’ actors) classes in the future. Two of the students were also revealed antibiotic properties of everyday items and particularly interested in creating art from biological supported new way of seeing materials such as plant leafs or bark. Working with (bio)art materials Biosensing for antibiotic properties The students’ actions and verbal descriptions of their work Once the students were introduced to the idea of observing highlighted parallels between biological materials and bacterial response to different materials, they expressed more traditional art supplies. At the same time, students interest in testing a range of products and household items. also noted some key differences that presented unique On the second day of the course, students brought in items experiences, challenges, and opportunities for the class. including alcohol wipes and handsoaps, Neosporin (a first aide cream) and different types of toothpastes. Two of the Parallels between bio and non-bio materials. There were Differences between bio and non-bio materials. At the many instances when the students discussed the biological same time, BLS1 rules necessitated a sequential workflow materials as being similar to other non-living craft supplies and led us to translate between representations rather than available in our lab. It was not uncommon to hear students mixing modalities. These translations highlighted to intermix art and biology verbs—“swab”, “dot”, “erase”, differences between our relationships with living and non- “sprinkle”, “pipette”, “swirl”—when describing their living materials. For instance, all of the students noted that actions. Examples include: looking at bacterial growth was somehow different than looking at a sketch or other non-living artwork (e.g., “if it I’m gonna do just a bunch of red lines and dots [with wasn’t bacteria it would be super cute”, S3). Part of the bacteria]. -S1 distinction came from the students’ understanding that the I might do like a swirl [of antibiotics] and see what will medium they were drawing with—the bacteria—had some happen. -S7 agency of its own. Verbs such as “grows”, “smells”, I’m going to do something abstract with the bacteria “minds”, and “eats” were commonly used to describe the colors and [food] dyes and stuff. -S3 bacteria, as in “Yes, it [bacteria] minds it [the toothpaste] So if we have food coloring can we like erase it? -S2 a lot” (S2). This led many students to reflect on the fact they were merely influencing bacterial growth rather than The above statements illustrate some of the ways in which fully controlling it: the students treated the bacteria, growth media, antibiotics, and other biomaterials as parallel to more traditional art We can change how the bacteria grows. -S4 supplies. Students fluidly transitioned between sketching The bioart was thus perceived to be shaped by both the with bacteria, pencils, and digital tools, as in, for example, children’s manipulation of bacteria, as well as the bacterial S6’s description of the stencil making process “I just used growth and interaction with antibiotic substances, which the pen tool in fireworks and traced the bacteria”. happened independently of the students’ work during The students streaked bacteria to recreate a range of incubation. This introduced an element of uncertainty into familiar designs. Example bacterial drawings included a the final outcome, and students were often surprised to see tree, the green lantern symbol, a star, or heats. how their petri dishes turned out: Interestingly, when the bacteria did not grow exactly as I didn’t think it would end up as a tree. -S1 intended, the students still interpreted the growth patterns I tried the white bacteria to see it would grow on a black in terms of familiar representations. For example, S1 background. -S2 thought his petri dish looked like “Jason Bourne”, and S6 described one design as a “heart balloon”. All of the It was so hard to draw because you can’t see where the students were visibly impressed with the growth patterns bacteria will grow. -S7 on their plates, e.g. “yours is sick, it’s like rustic copper” This uncertainty led some student to discuss that they (S3), “mine is super cool” (S7), etc. might not be able to “erase” bacteria streaks from the petri dishes, or have to “kill” their work. The uncertainty of The students’ use of biological materials as if they were living materials shifted our notion of control in studio similar to traditional art supplies was particularly salient activities and revealed how non-human entities enact during the sketching and planning sessions. When drawing agency on the design process. ideas for their final petri dish layouts, the students discussed the petri dishes as if they were similar to a more Engagement with broader scientific concepts traditional “canvas”: To varying degrees, all of our class activities led students to discuss scientific concepts and in some cases make I’m kinda looking at the entire thing as a work of art and connections between broader issues. For instance, informal so I’m thinking of using the yellow bacteria to make it kind conversations between students often revolved around of like it’s glowing and the entire thing would be like a biological terms, as illustrated by the following excerpts: planet or something. -S1 I used a really dark background [of food coloring and agar S1: What’s the word that defines kills bacteria? S1 growth medium] so I’m gonna use red bacteria for the red S3: Hm, what’s it called- sterilize? Sanitize? things and the yellow bacteria for the yellow stars. -S3 S2: I covered the plate in bacteria and I used the um I Fluid transitions between materials occurred in the forgot what it’s called… physical space when children and researchers referenced S1: Antibiotic! hand-drawn sketches while “painting” on petri dishes; and S2: Yea I use one of the antibiotics but I forgot what the all of us periodically checked the actual bacteria while antibiotic I used was called. making the digital stencils. In some cases, however, the S7: Ampicillin? fluidity was conceptual rather than physical—e.g. thinking of a petri dish as a canvas rather than actually paining on a In addition to these informal conversations amongst canvas with bacteria. themselves, the students also asked instructors questions that linked their hands-on work with broader concepts. For bioart initiatives inspired our studio course for junior example, S5 wanted to know “what happens if you use a highschool students. We discussed parallels between probiotic”, with led S3 to guess that probiotics “kill hands-on work with biological materials and traditional bacteria”, and S5 to predict that they “enhance bacteria”, design mediums, and highlighted how aspects of biology whereby R2 explained what probiotics are. In another studio practice supported engagement with broader issues. instance, S3’s question about “what would happen if you Our findings are thus aligned with our framing of DIYbio just left one of these [petri dishes] out with the lid off” led studio as an assembly of human and nonhuman actors the researchers explain the conditions for growing and around heterogeneous issues. In such spaces, activities killing fungus. The students also discussed differences between people and materials reveal local knowledge (in between viruses and bacteria, which led to a deeper our case, situated knowledge about antibiotic substances). discussion about flu shots and the scientific method: Such knowledge supports oppositional discourse and presents alternatives to top-down modes of scientific S4: But the flu is a virus. What if we run out of ways to.. dissemination [21, 47]. The resulting hybrid artifacts—in like how do we know what to take [in a flu shot]. our case, antibiotic-responsive bioart—materialize this R2: People do a bunch of testing on flu particles from all knowledge and express matters of local concern. around the world and there’s a committee of people that decide what each yearly flu vaccine is going to look like. We conclude by discussing two future areas for biology- S4: How do they know what it’s going to look like? themed design research: challenges and opportunities for R3: They estimate. working with hybrid (bio)materials, and studio-based S2: They form a hypothesis? biology practice as a platform for scientific engagement. R3: Exactly they form a hypothesis about which flu strains Integrating biological materials into design studio work are going to be the most prominent and they make the Design studio culture literature emphasizes persistent vaccine based off that. access to a variety of materials and open-ended materially- Finally, it is worth noting that we (the researchers) also oriented inquiry [6, 66, etc.]. These aspects of design initiated discussions that were grounded in the hands-on studio practice informed our DIYbio studio set-up and DIYbio work to explore topics around bacterial growth, bioart course activities. Our space, tools, and layout of antibiotic resistance, and personal health. The excerpts materials support interactions with biology, manual below illustrate how such conversations took shape: screenprinting, digital prototyping, and makerspace fabrication tools. As our findings show, this design-studio R1: How does bacteria become resistant to antibiotics? set-up and our integration of traditional art practice and S3: It mutates! DIY biology activities supported fluid transitions between S4:By like changing what it’s made of, if it has the right work with organic, digital, and analog materials and tools. things for its environment Indeed, our students created designs with bacteria, pencils S2: It mutates like it kind of learns and mutates and and markers, graphic design software (Adobe Fireworks), evolves and changes to fit the environment. and used a manual screenprinting press and vinyl cutter to create prints of antibiotic-responsive microbial art on R2: Did you guys know bacteria can exchange information woods, fabrics, paper, and clothing. Aspects of our studio about how to become antibiotic resistant? revealed similarities across materials, as in, for instance, S1: That’s cool for them but it sucks for us. the children’s use of traditional art vocabulary when R1: So can anyone guess why you shouldn’t stop taking describing their work with bacteria, the children’s antibiotics before you’re supposed to? transitions between paper sketches and streaked petri S3:‘cause then they’ll have time to exchange the dishes, or their overall approach to petri dish layouts as a information “work of art”. R2: That’s a way of selecting for resistant population. Our autoethnographic reflection also revealed that work The excerpts above illustrate how we used our hands-on with biomaterials changed aspects of studio culture. For activities to prompt reflection on broader scientific instance, some materials could not “blend” and BSL-1 concepts, and how these discussions led to deeper activities cannot use food, which is often incorporated into conversations about antibiotic resistance and public health. studio inquiry [3]. At the same time, hybrid DIYbio DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS practice also affords new engagements to generate situated Thus far, we have discussed insights from our work at the knowledge (e.g., through biosensing). The uncertainty and intersection of HCI studio and DIY biology. Over the delicacy of living systems also reframes ideas of control course of two years, our multidisciplinary research team and agency in the design process, and ties back to Latour’s has established a BLS-1 design studio in an HCI setting, concept of “non-human” actors that shape knowledge developed low-cost tools, and iterated on a range of production [47]. biology protocols and techniques in a studio context. Our Returning to Ascott’s vision of moistmedia, the latter self-reflexive practice and our in-depth review of related considerations exemplify how biomaterials might “constitute the substrate of the art of our new century, a policy debates around bioethics, biosafety, (de)regulation, transformative art concerned with the construction of a and access to personal health tools. HCI research has a lot fluid reality. This will mean the spread of intelligence to to contribute to scaffold these new forms of public every part of the built environment coupled with participation in biology: from low-cost tools for recognition of the intelligence that lies within every part of performing biology experiments (such as our incubator) the living planet.” [2]. and new fabrication techniques for creative making of science artifacts, to larger-scale data sharing platforms and Incorporating “moistmedia” into studio practice as we did interactive forums for discourse amongst DIYbio presents avenues for materially-oriented inquiry around communities. this provocative vision. On one hand, explorations that incorporate environmentally-responsive wetware such as Future studio work can also probe deeper into questions bacteria alongside digital fabrication technologies (“bits around hybrid materiality and the agency of living systems. and atoms”) can radially transform HCI research on Similar to prior research that examined how intelligence is environmental sensing. Organic systems can be used to perceived and enacted in digital devices [72], DIYbio visualize aspects of the environment that are hard to sense studio work can broaden our conception of technology to with digital technologies alone—for example the presence include organic materials and develop prototypes that of toxins, antibiotics, or sugars. New forms of DIY explore agency across living systems. Even in our rather biosensing, coupled with fabrication methods such as simple use of bacteria to test for the presence of antibiotics, screenprinting, 3D printing, or laser cutting can reveal junior highschool students reflected on how bacteria was “new ways of seeing” [44] and shift our understanding of combined with everyday objects to shape their final what sensors look and feel like. The resulting hybrid projects. Recent developments in synthetic biology present artifacts will inevitably reveal “seams” [10, 19] or much more complex ecosystems whereby engineering junctures where materials, processes, and ideas intersect. principles are being applied to the design of living systems Iterative studio work can explore the implications of such and human and non-human actors continue to restructure hybrid (bio)materials and artifacts, by, for instance our understanding of life and autonomy. Biology-enabled studying the affordances and constraints of the objects design studio practice can apply longstanding HCI [e.g., around us [58]. 26, 28, 30, 62] to explore the impliations of embedding biological materials into everyday objects and/or extending DIYbio studio as a space for engaging with issues Design studio work is characterized by exploring engineering and design metaphors to biological systems. heterogenous issues [42], which often include not only the CONCLUSION practical challenges of a project but also its social impacts. This paper framed DIYbio—hands-on work with biology In our case, our autoethnographic work with DIYbio outside of professional settings—as a design studio protocols, as well as our frequent reflections on our practice. We presented our autoethnographic process process, led us to engage with a range of complex issues whereby our multidisciplinary team set up a BSL-1 design around public participation in science. These spanned studio, practiced biology protocols, and iteratively questions around feasibility and access, as well as broader designed low-cost tools to support this work. Insights from concerns about human manipulation of living systems and our self-reflexive practice led us to develop a bioart course (un)intentional use of DIYbio for harmful purposes. These that combined techniques from microbiology, fine arts, and questions pushed us to work across academic disciplines, digital design to create antibiotic-responsive microbial art with the engineers, for instance, understanding more about artifacts. Our approach embraced design studio culture the delicate and uncertain life processes; and biologists through open-ended activities, access to a variety of design gaining deeper knowledge of (bio)electronic tools. media, frequent reflection and feedback from peers, and Likewise, during our bioart course, hands-on work with work on projects that materialized heterogeneous concerns. bacteria and antibiotics presented touchpoints for students Above all, we hope to have shown that linking hybrid to reflect on the “big picture” [42]. practices in a studio setting is a powerful approach for HCI because it offers new ways to engage with issues. This Our work suggests that DIYbio studio can serve as a approach can be applied to support meaningful discourse platform for engagement with broader social and scientific around the intellectual and social challenges poses by issues. On the one hand, initiatives that invite people to emerging biotechnologies. work on iterative and collaborative projects with bacteria, antibiotics, aseptic lab techniques—and a host of other REFERENCES protocols that can be easily supported by a BSL-1 1. American Society for Microbiology. Agar Art facility—can expose participants to new ideas across Contest. https://www.asm.org/index.php/public- disciplines and domains. Such hands-on work can invite outreach/agar-art stakeholders to construct personal meaning around the 2. Roy Ascott. 2007. Telematic Embrace: Visionary underlying scientific concepts, and potentially inspire more Theories of Art, Technology, and Consciousness. active citizenship and collective involvement in science University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 3. Shaowen Bardzell, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Sarah education (SIGCSE '11). ACM, New York, NY, Ng. 2017. Supporting Cultures of Making: USA, 649-654. Technology, Policy, Visions, and Myths. In 15. Center for Genomic Gastronomy. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on http://genomicgastronomy.com/ Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). 16. Critical Art Ensemble. http://critical-art.net/ ACM, New York, NY, USA, 6523-653. 17. Carlson, R. H. Biology is Technology: The 4. Bell, P., Bricker, L. A., Reeve, S., Zimmerman, Promise, Peril, and New Business of Engineering H. T., & Tzou, C. (in press). Discovering and Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, Supporting Successful Learning Pathways of 2010. Youth In and Out Of School: Accounting for the 18. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Development of Everyday Expertise Across Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Settings. In B. Bevan, P. Bell, & R. Stevens Laboratories (BMBL) 5th Edition. (Eds.), Learning about Out of School Time http://www.cdc.gov/biosafety/publications/bmbl5/ (LOST) Learning Opportunities: Springer. 5. Blevis, E., Lim, Y.K., Stolterman, E., Makice, K. 19. Matthew Chalmers, Areti Galani, Seamful (2008). The Iterative Design of a Virtual Design interweaving: heterogeneity in the theory and Studio. Techtrends: A Journal of the Association design of interactive systems, Proceedings of the for Educational Communications and Technology. 5th conference on Designing interactive systems: Springer US. Volume 52, Number 1. 74-83. processes, practices, methods, and techniques, 6. Eli Blevis, Youn-kyung Lim, Erik Stolterman, August 01-04, 2004, Cambridge, MA, USA Tracee Vetting Wolf, and Keichi Sato. 2007. Supporting design studio culture in HCI. In CHI 20. Chi, M. T. H., & Menekse, M. (2015). Dialogue '07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in patterns that promote learning. In L. B. Resnick, Computing Systems (CHI EA '07). ACM, New C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing York, NY, USA, 2821-2824. intelligence through academic talk and dialogue 7. Sarah J. Berman. Bacterial Painting. (Ch. 21, pp. 263-274). Washington, DC: AERA. http://www.sarahjberman.com/bacteriapainting 21. Carl DiSalvo, Jonathan Lukens, Thomas Lodato, 8. Bilda, Z., Edmonds, E., and Candy, L., Designing Tom Jenkins, and Tanyoung Kim. 2014. Making for creative engagement. Design Studies 29, 6 public things: how HCI design can express (2008), 525-540. matters of concern. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing 9. Biocurious. http://biocurious.org/ Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 10. Geoffery C. Bowker , Susan Leigh Star, Sorting 2397-2406. things out: classification and its consequences, 22. Anna Dumitriu. Infective Textiles. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000 http://annadumitriu.tumblr.com/InfectiveTextiles 11. Brahms, L. & Crowley, K. (in press). Making 23. Rob Dunn. 2010. Painting With Penicillin: Sense of Making: Defining Learning Practices in Alexander Fleming’s Germ Art. Smithsonian.org. MAKE Magazine. In Y. Kafai & K. Pepler (Eds). http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science- Makeology. nature/painting-with-penicillin-alexander- flemings-germ-art-1761496/ 12. Bauer, AW; Kirby, WM; Sherris, JC; Turck, M (April 1966). "Antibiotic susceptibility testing by 24. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. Speculative a standardized single disk method.". American Everything. MIT Press 2013. journal of clinical pathology. 45 (4): 493–6. 25. Rob Faludi, Kate Hartman, and Kati London. 13. Carolina Biological. Pigmented Bacteria Set. Botanicals. https://www.botanicalls.com/ https://www.carolina.com/bacteria/pigmented- 26. Gaver, W. W., Boucher, A., Law, A., Pennington, bacteria-set/FAM_154745.pr S., Bowers, J., Beaver, J., Humble, J., Kerridge, 14. Katherine Cennamo, Sarah A. Douglas, Mitzi T., Villar, N. and Wilkie, A. Threshold devices: Vernon, Carol Brandt, Brigitte Scott, Yolanda looking out from the home. In Proc. CHI ’08, Reimer, and Margarita McGrath. 2011. Promoting ACM Press (2008), 1429-1438. creativity in the computer science design studio. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical 27. Genspace. https://www.genspace.org/ symposium on Computer science 28. Daniel Fallman. (2007) Why Research-Oriented (Eds.), Vol. 1. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 171- Design Isn’t Design-Oriented Research: On the 180. Tensions Between Design and Research in an 39. Viirj Kan, Emma Vargo, Noa Machover, Hiroshi Implicit Design Discipline. Know Techn Pol Ishii, Serena Pan, Weixuan Chen, and Yasuaki (2007) 20: 193. Kakehi. 2017. Organic Primitives: Synthesis and 29. Foad Hamidi and Melanie Baljko. 2017. Engaging Design of pH-Reactive Materials using Molecular Children Using a Digital Living Media System. I/O for Sensing, Actuation, and Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17). ACM, Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). New York, NY, USA, 711-723. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 989-1000. 30. Helmes, J., Taylor, A. S., Cao, X., Höök , K., 40. Cindy Hsin-Liu Kao, Bichlien Nguyen, Asta Schmitt, P., and Villar, N. Rudiments 1, 2 & 3: Roseway, and Michael Dickey. 2017. EarthTones: design speculations on autonomy. In Proc. TEI Chemical Sensing Powders to Detect and Display ’11, ACM Press (2011), 145-152. Environmental Hazards through Color Variation. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference 31. Hertz, G., Cockroach controlled mobile robot. Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Garnet Hertz-Http://conceptlabcom, (2008). Computing Systems (CHI EA '17). ACM, New 32. Honey, M., Kanter, D. E. Design, Make, Play. York, NY, USA, 872-883. Growing the next generation of STEM innovators. 41. Riedel-Kruse, I.H., A.M. Chung, B. Dura, A.L. Routledge, 2013. Hamilton, and B.C. Lee, Design, engineering and 33. C. D. Hundhausen, D. Fairbrother, and M. Petre. utility of biotic games. Lab on a Chip, 11, 1 2012. An Empirical Study of the “Prototype (2011), 14-22. Walkthrough”: A Studio-Based Activity for HCI 42. Kuhn, S. (2001). Learning from the Architecture Education. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Studio: Implications for Project-Based Pedagogy. Interact. 19, 4, Article 26 (December 2012), 36 International Journal of Engineering Education, pages. 17, 349-352. 34. Ingold, T. Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, 43. Satoshi Kuribayashi and Akira Wakita. 2006. Art and Architecture. Routledge, London, 2013. PlantDisplay: turning houseplants into ambient 35. Michael Eisenberg. 2004. Tangible ideas for display. In Proceedings of SIGCHI ACE 2006, children: materials sciences as the future of Article 40. educational technology. In Proceedings of the 44. Stacey Kuznetsov, William Odom, James Pierce, 2004 conference on Interaction design and and Eric Paulos. 2011. Nurturing natural sensors. children: building a community (IDC '04). ACM, In Proceedings of the 13th international New York, NY, USA, 19-26. conference on Ubiquitous computing (UbiComp 36. Piyum Fernando, Matthew Pandelakis, and Stacey '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 227-236. Kuznetsov. 2016. Practicing DIYBiology In An 45. Stacey Kuznetsov, Alex S. Taylor, Tim Regan, HCI Setting. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Nicolas Villar, and Eric Paulos. 2012. At the Conference Extended Abstracts on Human seams: DIYbio and opportunities for HCI. Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2064-2071. Systems Conference(DIS '12). ACM, New York, 37. Holstius, D., Kembel, J., Hurst, A., Wan, P. H., NY, USA, 258-267. and Forlizzi, J. 2004. Infotropism: living and 46. Stacey Kuznetsov, Laura C. Trutoiu, Casey Kute, robotic plants as interactive displays. In Iris Howley, Eric Paulos, and Dan Siewiorek. Proceedings of the 5th conference on Designing 2011. Breaking boundaries: strategies for interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, mentoring through textile computing workshops. and techniques, 215-221. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on 38. Cindy Lin Kaiying and Silvia Lindtner. 2016. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11). Legitimacy, boundary objects & participation in ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2957-2966. transnational DIY biology. In Proceedings of the 47. Latour, B. "From Realpolitik to Dingpolitik." In 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full Making Things Public: Atmospheres of papers - Volume 1 (PDC '16), Claus Bossen, Democracy, Weibel, P. and B. Latour, eds. MIT Rachel Charlotte Smith, Anne Marie Kanstrup, Press: Cambridge MA (2005), 14--44. Janet McDonnell, Maurizio Teli, and Keld Bødker 48. Silvia Lindtner, Garnet D. Hertz, and Paul 57. Neustaedter, C., Sengers. P. 2012. Dourish. 2014. Emerging sites of HCI innovation: Autobiographical design: what you can learn from hackerspaces, hardware startups & incubators. designing for yourself. interactions 19, 6 In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on (November 2012), 28-33. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). 58. D. Norman, The Psychology of Everyday Things, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 439-448. Basic Books, New York (1988). 49. Lumen Microbiology. Testing the Effectiveness 59. Johanna Okerlund, Evan Segreto, Casey Grote, of Antimicrobials. Lauren Westendorf, Anja Scholze, Romie Littrell, https://courses.lumenlearning.com/microbiology/c and Orit Shaer. 2016. SynFlo: A Tangible hapter/testing-the-effectiveness-of-antimicrobials/ Museum Exhibit for Exploring Bio-Design. 50. Microbial Art. http://www.microbialart.com/ In Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and 51. Seung Ah Lee, Engin Bumbacher, Alice M. Embodied Interaction(TEI '16). ACM, New York, Chung, Nate Cira, Byron Walker, Ji Young Park, NY, USA, 141-149. Barry Starr, Paulo Blikstein, and Ingmar H. Riedel-Kruse. 2015. Trap it!: A Playful Human- 60. OpenPCR. http://openpcr.org/ Biology Interaction for a Museum Installation. 61. Pearl Biotech. https://pearlbiotech.com/ In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing 62. James Pierce and Eric Paulos. 2014. Some Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, variations on a counterfunctional digital camera. 2593-2602. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems (DIS '14). ACM, 52. Seung Ah Lee, Alice M. Chung, Nate Cira, and New York, NY, USA, 131-140. DOI: Ingmar H. Riedel-Kruse. 2015. Tangible https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2602968 Interactive Microbiology for Informal Science Education. In Proceedings of the Ninth 63. Andrew Quitmeyer and Hannah Perner-Wilson. International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, 2015. Wearable studio practice: design and Embodied Interaction (TEI '15). ACM, New considerations for digital crafting in harsh York, NY, USA, 273-280. environments. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive 53. Anna Loparev, Amanda Sullivan, Clarissa Verish, and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of Lauren Westendorf, Jasmine Davis, Margaret the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Flemings, Marina Bers, and Orit Shaer. 2017. Wearable Computers (UbiComp/ISWC'15 BacToMars: Creative Engagement with Bio- Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1285- Design for Children. In Proceedings of the 2017 1293. Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 64. Ratto, Matt (2011). "Critical Making: Conceptual 623-628. and Material Studies in technology and Social Life". The Information Society. 27: 252. 54. Anna Loparev, Lauren Westendorf, Margaret Flemings, Jennifer Cho, Romie Littrell, Anja 65. Ali Schachtschneider. Bacterial Textiles. Scholze, and Orit Shaer. 2017. BacPack: http://www.alischachtschneider.com/material- Exploring the Role of Tangibles in a Museum archive.html Exhibit for Bio-Design. In Proceedings of the 66. Schon, D. 1986. The Design Studio: An Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '17). Exploration of Its Traditions and Potentials. Intl ACM, New York, NY, USA, 111-120. Specialized Book Service 67. Science Buddies Staff. 2017. How Well Do 55. National Research Council. (2009). Learning in Disinfectants Work?. from Informal Environments: People, Places, and https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair- Pursuits. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., projects/project- and Feder, M. A., Editors. ideas/MicroBio_p012/microbiology/how-well-do- 56. Carman Neustaedter, Tejinder K. Judge and disinfectants-work Phoebe Sengers. 2014. Autobiographical Design 68. Phoebe Sengers and Chris Csikszentmihályi. in the Home. Studying and Designing Technology 2003. HCI and the arts: a conflicted for Domestic Life: Lessons from Home, 135. convergence?. In CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Morgan Kaufmann Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA 78. Wark, M. A Hacker Manifesto. Cambridge, MA: '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 876-877. Harvard University Press, 2004. 69. Orit Shaer, Oded Nov, Anne West, and Diana 79. Lining Yao, Jifei Ou, Chin-Yi Cheng, Helene Eastman. 2014. Understanding information Steiner, Wen Wang, Guanyun Wang, and Hiroshi practices of interactive personal genomics users. Ishii. 2015. bioLogic: Natto Cells as In CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors Nanoactuators for Shape Changing Interfaces. in Computing Systems (CHI EA '14). ACM, New In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM York, NY, USA, 2455-2460. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 70. Sheridan, K., Rosenfeld Halverson, E., Litts, B., 1-10. Brahms, L., Jacobs-Priebe, L., Owens, T. (2014) Learning in the Making: A Comparative Case 80. Adam Zaretsky. http://www.emutagen.com/ Study of Three Makerspaces. Harvard Educational Review: December 2014, Vol. 84, No. 4, pp. 505-531. 71. SymbioticA. http://www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/ 72. Alex S. Taylor. 2009. Machine intelligence. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2109-2118 73. Alex S. Taylor, Nir Piterman, Samin Ishtiaq, Jasmin Fisher, Byron Cook, Caitlin Cockerton, Sam Bourton, and David Benque. 2013. At the interface of biology and computation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493-502. 74. van Eck, W. and Lamers, M.H., Hybrid BiologicalDigital Systems in Artistic and Entertainment Computing. Leonardo 46, 2 (2013), 151-158. 75. Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Colin M. Gray, Paul Parsons, and Nancy Rasche. 2017. Advancing UX Education: A Model for Integrated Studio Pedagogy. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1441-1446. 76. Guanyun Wang, Lining Yao, Wen Wang, Jifei Ou, Chin-Yi Cheng, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2016. xPrint: A Modularized Liquid Printer for Smart Materials Deposition. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5743-5752. 77. Wen Wang, Lining Yao, Teng Zhang, Chin-Yi Cheng, Daniel Levine, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2017. Transformative Appetite: Shape-Changing Food Transforms from 2D to 3D by Water Interaction through Cooking. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 6123-6132.