Clearly, the most salient difference between the photograph that appears here and the physical structure that it depicts are the 2D vs. 3D charateristics.  Related to that, then, is the issue of context.  As it appears here, the image has been decontextualized.  It appears solitary; visually isolated from the environment in which it was created. Because the iPads, books, writing materials and other personal belongings of classmates as well as their persons are not evident here, the image must be read at face value. There is no evidence that it was a collaborative creation among classmates or of the educational intent of the creative exercise. The image is forced to stand alone and be interpreted based only upon what appears in the photograph.  The actual 3D structure, on the other hand, was part of a dynamic and active environment; a multisensory milieu in which not only the visual but also the auditory (i.e. class dialogue & movement) and olfactory (i.e. perfumes, snacks, etc.) dimensions participated in the overall perception of the work of art.  The image might evoke memories of the learning activity for the class partipants, but those who were not present during its creation are forced to read it through the lens of their own knowledge and experience.  Their understanding of the structure will be limited to its formal qualities and personal narratives.

Interestingly and from a purely aesthetic viewpoint, I think the image itself appears more artful and interesting in 2D than in 3D.  Within the picture plane, it lacks the frivolity and haphazzardness of the environment in which it was created, making it more serene. The black shadow framing the work itself serves to tame the environment and give it a more polished and finished appearance.

PLAY allows artists to suspend  disbelief; to follow the creative impulse through attempts, failures, and reinvention.  In the spirit of play, the artist focuses on the process, not the objective of producing a work that is necessarily successful or "good" by external standards.  PLAY invites experimentation, thinking through materials, and creative risk taking.  I think Sandy Skogland uses a "postponement of meaning" approach, which is very compatible with play and certainly applicable here.  Play starts the ball rolling; knowledge and skill can later refine the playful product into a work that is not only innovative and unique, but also conceptually sound.