top of page
banner biosphere.jpg


Biosphere 2.1

An interactive and educational art exhibit


 

Adrian Granchelli.jpg

By Adrian Granchelli,
       a learning designer,
       instructor,
       mechanical engineer,
       maker and artist.


Bachelor of applied science in Mechanical engineering (2015)
Master in Educational Technology (2022)


 

 

 

Biosphere 2.1 is an interactive exhibit that provides multiple means of participation, for people of all ages to experience first-hand how their actions directly influence their environment. This experience aims to inform and inspire individuals about environmental responsibility; highlighting the sensitive connections present in our natural world and an individual’s influences that contribute to an ever-changing environment.

The exhibit consists of a self-standing, geodesic dome with cozy seating, atmospheric music, and a large art piece in the centre of the space. The interior of the dome and the centrepiece are covered with interactive lighting that turns on or off by touch. This environment aims to create a space of play and wonder to deliver experiences influencing its participants and offering a shift in perspective. The exterior and interior surfaces of the dome, as well as the ground, are media to place phrases, facts, and imagery. The dome can transform into a game by utilizing the interactivity provided by the lighting.

The experience of Biosphere 2.1 is that of the physical space and that which the participants bring to the space. There is significant autonomy and opportunity for participants to apply their own meaning and to hold influence over the environment. This dynamic between the person, other participants, and the environment mimics symbiosis and highlights the interconnectedness between various species as well as their ecosystem.


 



The Game
 

The entire interior of the dome can transform into an inclusive, cooperative game for its visitors. The game will likely begin as a surprise to its participants, with the game dynamics being simple, scaffolded, and explained by pre-recording narration. Participants may be pulled into the wonder of the exhibit from ephemeral narration and a dark, mysterious tone where the players must step up to be heroes.


The lights of the dome slowly turn off as darkness overcomes the dome. The goal for the people inside of the dome is to fight off the darkness with light by manually touching each inactive light to turn it on. Lights will turn off again if enough time has passed without being activated.

Participants must work together to turn all of the lights back on, and once they do, then that level will be complete.
Levels can increase in difficulty by deactivating a greater number of lights, introducing patterns of lights deactivating, and/or employing a shorter time period between activation and deactivation.

The game is elaborated using the elements outlined by Fullerton (2014) below.

Players: Everyone - collaboratively

Objective:  To keep the lights on.

Procedure: The starting action is the beginning of each level, which occurs most dramatically at the very start of the game and before each level, dictated by narration and a drastic deactivation of lights. Audio narration will provide instructions on how participants should proceed. The progression of action is the ongoing gameplay that happens in no particular order. The computer will turn off some lights, while the players attempt to keep the lights on by touching the inactive lights to activate them.
 

Play: It is an easy game to play, with few rules. There is a lot of potential for ‘free play’.

Story: The game objectives, rules, and educational merit will be delivered through narration and story. The narrator of the story is the environment of the dome, personified (not dissimilar to the character of “mother nature”).

Win: The use of a variable reward has the power to keep people interested (Eyal & Hoover, 2014).
After successful completion of each level, one of many possible light shows will play as well as a congratulatory message and story progression from the narration.

At the very end of the game, a compartment of the centrepiece will open revealing a ‘take-something-leave-something’ treasure chest. Such a win scenario will act as a memorable surprise, a secret worth sharing by word-of-mouth, and a variable reward, since the contents of this compartment will change as people gain access to it.

The Levels

Below is an outline of potential levels for the game within Biosphere 2.1. Playtesting is recommended with the physical exhibit to determine which elements, rules, and features are fun, promote cooperation, and induce flow (Fullerton, 2014).

Level 1 - Learning Gameplay
The first level of the game is designed to be very easy and impossible to lose. The goal is to provide an enjoyable experience and to teach players how to play.


Lights will deactivate only one at a time to minimize changes and confusion, and easily provide signalling to the deactivated light. Different colour or flashing of nearby lights can be utilized if additional signalling is necessary to locate the one deactivated light.


Level 2 - Speed round of simple lights
The second level incorporates the same simple on/off for the lights. To make things more challenging, many lights go off at once. Lights will also be on a timer, so once a light has been activated, it will deactivate itself if the level is not complete.


Once all the lights are on at the same time, then the level will be complete.


Level 3 - Introduction to ‘coupled lights’
‘Coupled lights’ will be two lights that must be deactivated at the same time forcing cooperation amongst players. A different light setting will be utilized to demonstrate which lights are ‘coupled’ such as dim coloured light, or light that flashes between off and coloured. Lights that are coupled will share the same colour (i.e. red or blue).


The third level will introduce players to ‘coupled lights’, one at a time similar to how level 1 introduced gameplay. Simple lights will also be interspersed to remind players of their rules.


Level 4 - Speed round of ‘coupled lights’
The fourth level is an escalation of the concept introduced in the third level, where multiple ‘coupled lights’ exist at the same time, and will automatically deactivate if enough time passes between activation. This level is similar to Level 2, except with 'coupled lights'.


Level 5 - Speed round all together
The final level includes the simple lights and the coupled lights simultaneously.

 

There are many opportunities for creative rules to be incorporated such as a ‘travelling darkness’ where light needs to be interacted with at the correct moment, ‘mine’ lights where if they are interacted with will infect nearby lights with darkness, ‘mystery’ lights that ought to be interacted with but do not visually appear-so and are signalled with sound or other nearby lights.
To reiterate, this gameplay is flexible and should be playtested and iterated to find an optimal set of rules.

 


Try out the game prototype below.

Be sure to allow the autoplay of audio (the setting is usually found beside the web address)

The best experience is on desktop.



Person-Centred Design
 

This environment aimed to target the most common reasons people visit museums (Wilis, 2019) by including multiple means for participation: 

  • a social space for those that want to be together with people (i.e. friends, family, strangers),

  • seating arrangements for those who want to be comfortable,

  • informational graphics for those who want an opportunity to learn, and

  • an interactive environment with both free play and an organized game for those who enjoy the challenge of a new experience and want to do something active


These opportunities for participation also align with the categories as described in Universal Design for Learning – to provide multiple means for engagement, representations, action and expression (CAST, 2022) - and by the 4MAT – learners are interested in knowing why, what, how, and/or what if (McCarthy, Germain, & Lippitt, 2002). 



Meeting Design Requirements
 

 The initial primary purposes for this interactive art exhibit are:

  1. To develop a physical space that is interactive and engaging

  2. To inform and inspire participants on environmental responsibility

 

1. To develop a physical space that is interactive and engaging

Interactivity is core to the design of this exhibit with respect for an entangled becoming between participants and the exhibit. The design includes possibilities for a ‘third zone’ to emerge - a space between, and of both, the exhibit and the users; a space which Willisworth calls a ‘good-enough holding environment’. This is a “space and time of an attentive, responsive holding of demands and invitations that carry the potential for transitional experience”; a transitional experience being an experience that occurs in the ‘third zone’, from the combination of the inner and outer influences, which may act as a profound learning moment (Ellsworth, 2004).

The embedded interactivity and engagement in the exhibit take the form of invitation, surprise, story, play, instant feedback, and variable reward.


​The space is implicitly inviting by providing multiple means for engagement, from infographics to seating. During the game, the narrator explicitly includes participants in the story inviting them to play. The narration tells a story that provides content, context, and can elicit an emotional response (Fullerton, 2014). Play facilitates engagement through the interactive lights, as well as gameplay. Vermeeren and Calvi (2019) explain that play is not only an opportunity for enjoyment or pleasure, but also for meaningful and memorable experiences. When participants engage with the Biosphere 2.1, they are provided with instant feedback.  This feedback increases the potential of developing a ‘third zone’ between participant and exhibit, as it satisfies a fleeting attention span, and exemplifies a connection between actions and outcomes. This connection may lead a participant to understand how to utilize the exhibit as a tool (action network theory) (Latour, 1992), or assimilate it as an extension of their own senses (media ecology) (Strate & Lum, 2000). Variable rewards, (such as the treasure chest), may add intrigue and/or repeated interaction (Eyal & Hoover, 2014). Finally, cooperation is evident throughout the gameplay allowing for social interaction and engagement, which can be motivating due to social recognition and awareness (Fogg, 2003)

 



2. To inform and inspire participants on environmental responsibility

Biosphere 2.1 is designed to inform and inspire participants about the interconnectedness and sensitivity of the natural world with an emphasis on how everybody contributes to a changing environment. Success would be achieved  if participants leave the experience with a greater understanding or a desire to learn more about the environment and the role that they play, and/or a feeling of awe and wonder about environments.


Biosphere 2.1 includes the learning objectives embedded as infographics and game elements. Some of the media have been chosen for their affordances, subscribing to  McLuhan’s (1964) concept that “the medium is the message”.


The dome shape is spherical – a more organic shape than a cuboid – and is mostly closed off from outside view, implying a self-contained system. The structure of Biosphere 2.1 aims to represent an ecosystem that participants feel a part of which, sets the tone for the experience. Infographics are integrated into the space to provide more concrete context to the experience.


A phrase wrapping the outside of the dome can only be viewed in full by changing perspectives, and circumnavigating the dome. Additionally, the start and the end of the image is malleable. A potential phrase that can wrap around the dome is “the light within me is about to go off”, which references light, a game element, and includes the word ‘me’ which may be interpreted as the personified dome or the participant reading it.


On the ground of the entrance are the graphics of EGO/ECO, where ECO is read upon entering and EGO upon exiting, implying that a view of ‘eco’ (interdependency, cooperation, etc.) exists within the dome and ‘ego’ in the rest of the world. The centre art piece sits atop a ‘Jenga’-like structure with a caption of “A Dangerous Game”. Each block of the structure has written on it components of a healthy ecosystem and is angled as to be readable from a standing height. This structure highlights that things in a system are interdependent. Lighting can be utilized to add or remove spotlight from specific blocks to integrate the metaphor of light as species used as a game dynamic. Written inside the winning compartment is the phrase: “It's hard to be a bright light in a dim world.”, which celebrates the accomplishment of players succeeding in the hard task presented by the game and insinuates a continuing effort to being ‘a bright light’.

 

 

 

 

The media in which these infographics are portrayed each carry a form and intrinsic bias in communicating their messages (Lum, 2009). These media are novel compared to typical poster presentations of content and demand movement to read, are hidden, or displayed in irregular locations. This novelty may act as a motivating feature for participants to engage (Suter, 2014). Additionally, the media include ‘desirable difficulties’, which demand more cognitive engagement from the viewer potentially leading to deeper integration and better content retention (Diemand-Yauman, Oppenheimer, & Vaughan 2010).

Games have the power to make people see the everyday world around them in new ways (Gee & Gee, 2017). This game uses light as a metaphor for life, energy, or a ‘pleasant’ environment. Multiple lights may represent different components of an ecosystem. This exhibit shows that without synchronized work or effort, the lights go off – translated to our planet, without effort, species and ecosystems will go extinct. This concept is translated through the game dynamics, narration, and story.


Gameplay demands a more active role by the participant and is another example where ‘desirable difficulties’ exist (Diemand-Yauman, Oppenheimer, & Vaughan 2010). Additionally, “story integrated with play can create powerful emotional results” (Fullerton, 2014). This story situates the player as part of the story by default. That is, those who are in the space during the ‘trigger’ are involved in the narrative. This demonstrates the inability to opt-out of society or society's problems and that doing nothing progresses the status quo or makes things worse. While people can choose to play or not to play (Fullerton, 2014), the surprise and extrinsic motivation presented by the environment may persuade people to become players.

While there is some explicit context from the infographics present in the space and in the story narration, there is still much left for the participant to attach meaning to. This ambiguity allows the participant to develop their own meaning, which is more aligned with a constructivist pedagogy (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Moreover, the influence the participant holds aids in the development of the ‘third-zone’ (Ellsworth, 2004) as described above. The question remains to what extent participants will discern the intending meaning embedded in Biosphere 2.1.



Security
 

In an environment of low light, there is the opportunity for pickpockets, groping, and other delinquency. In order to mitigate this, the lights will dim to an acceptable level of darkness in the dome.

There are methods of changing the lights that may lead to dramatic effect and should be experimented with for example, as a light ‘deactivates’, it could dip to completely off before turning back on to a dim setting, or it could flash very bright, before going dim in order to constrict a viewer's pupils and develop the sense of darker light.

The potential for vandalism of Biosphere 2.1 must be considered in relation to the space that it is installed in. There is the potential to destroy, break, steal, or vandalize components, graffiti upon, and more.  A design failure mechanism effect analysis should be conducted.



Conclusions
 

Theories from constructivism, behaviourism, game design, new materialism, and neuroscience have been utilized in the design of Biosphere 2.1 in effort to create a remarkable and impactful learning experience. Many different participants are catered to with a person-centred approach such as with the employment of universal design for learning that provides multiple opportunities for engagement, representation, action, and expression (CAST, 2022).  Biosphere 2.1 creates a physical space for participants to interact with in effort to inform and inspire about environmental interconnectedness and individual influences.



Explore the 3D model on your own below.

 



References
 

CAST. (2022). The UDL Guidelines. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org/


Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D., & Vaughan, E. (2010). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized ): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. International Journal of Cognitive Science. 118. (p. 111-115). Elsevier.


Ellsworth, L. (2004). Places of learning: Media, Architecture, Pedagogy. Routledge.   

 

Eyal, N. & Hoover, R. (2014). Chapter 6 - What Are You Going to Do with This?. In Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products (p. 196-213).‎ Penguin Group.

 

Fogg, B. (2003). Chapter 8 - Increasing Persuasion Through Mobility and Connectivity. In M. Kaufmann. Persuasive Technology (pp. 183-210). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-155860643-2/50010-X.

 

Fullerton, T. (2014). Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, NY: Taylor & Francis (CRS Press)

 

Gee, E., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as distributed teaching and learning systems. Teachers College Record, 119(11).

 

Latour, B. (1992) 'Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts', in Bijker, W. E. and Law, J. (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, pp. 225-58.

 

Lum, C. M. K. (2000) Introduction: The intellectual roots of media ecology. 8:1, (p. 1-7). DOI: 10.1080/15456870009367375

 

McCarthy, B., Germain, C., & Lippitt, L. (2002). The 4MAT research guide, about Learning, Incorporated, Wauconda, Illinois.

 

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

 

Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241-251

 

Strate, L. & Casey Lum, C. M. K. (2000) Lewis Mumford and the ecology of technics, Atlantic Journal of Communication, 8:1, 56-78,    DOI: 10.1080/15456870009367379

 

Suter, W. N. (2014). Educators as Critical Thinkers. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.

 

Vermeeren, A. & Calvi, L. (2019). Relevance by Play: An Integrated Framework for Designing Museum Experiences. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Paper LBW0127, 1–6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3312960

 

Willis, T. (2019). Exhibit Development: The Art of Storytelling in Exhibitions.  B.C. Museums Association. Retrieved from: https://museum.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Exhibit-Dev-Tool-The-Art-of-Storytelling-120.pdf
 

bottom of page