Rebecca Heaton on Art and Design Education

Investigating cognition in the creative arts.

By

To curate

What does it mean to curate? Can art, thought, cognition, concepts, learning and lived experiences all be curated? Is it the curation of these facets, in ones experience as an artist teacher, that leads to knowledge generation? I ask myself these questions after a day exploring the concept of curation with Katie Boyce from the Alfred East Gallery and artist teachers from Northampton University. img_0026

From a theoretical perspective curating means to organise concepts and actively take on the role of curator (Macdonald, 2009), I contextualise this as an artist teacher to mean the designer of your own thoughts and outputs. The role of the curator involves researching, exhibition design, selection and a responsibility to communicate thought (Haas, 2003). The curator makes links between thoughts, concepts, art and cultural contexts (Acord, 2010). So as I see it, we are all curators and creators of our own cognition, as a creator we generate thought and knowledge . As a curator we design and own the paths we formulate. I offer insight into how I managed the role of curator and creator today. 

Curating: I formulated thought today through the exposure to new and unexpected experiences whilst making connections to prior experiences I had encountered. Whilst listening to Katie and the artist teachers discussing how exhibitions were organised at the Alfred East Gallery in Kettering, I began to connect threads of thought from a number of recent experiences I have had myself as an artist teacher. These threads interconnected to help me build knowledge.

For example, Katie shared how the recent exhibition, hosted by the Alfred East Gallery, Collection Connections (see images below) used links between the range of artists on show to map out relationships, histories and personal stories. The links were portrayed visually using colours to generate maps, in a similar way to the London tube map, it was this notion of mapping that connected with me. I reflected that I had recently posted on this blog about cognitive links and theoretical webs and theorised through my doctoral writing that experiencing and reflecting on intercultural, interdisciplinary (Bresler, 2016) and multi-directional (Stanley, 2015) pathways was one strategy which led artist teachers to generate knowledge. The value of interdisciplinary and intercultural arts based research was also reinforced in a seminar by Professor Pam Burnard @Pam Burnard I attended at Homerton College Cambridge University on Tuesday 22nd November 2016. This experience again connected with the metaphorical web of cognitive curation I was generating in my own mind to connect, consolidate and curate my own learning to ultimately build knowledge. Through the  process of connecting I had been actively curating cognition because I had been making links, as Acord (2010) stated between thoughts, concepts, art experiences and cultural contexts. 

screen-shot-2016-11-29-at-21-40-30 img_0022

Creating: As creators artist teachers can take responsibility for generating thought and knowledge. In todays experience I did this in a number of ways, I was open to the art experience I encountered influencing my own and students learning, I took a risk to invite another to assist in the pedagogical structure of the course I had designed and was willing to reflect on the experience and apply reflexivity (Grushka, 2005) to this reflection, through this blog, to identify how the learning pathways I generated led to the creation of thought. As a result todays experience impacted my own development as an artist, teacher and researcher because I learnt more about the process of curation, questioned my own pedagogy and have identified how as a researcher I curate cognition within the lived artist teacher experience I encountered today. After all “The arts move us to see what is hidden or tacit to ourselves” (Burnard et al, 2014, p.101). 

References:

Acord, S. (2010). Beyond the head: The practical work of curating contemporary art. Journal of Qualitative Sociology, 33, 447-467.

Bresler, L. (2016). Interdisciplinary, intercultural travels: mapping a spectrum of research(er) experiences. In Burnard, P. Mackinlay, E. and Powell, K. (eds) The Routledge International Handbook of Intercultural Arts Research. Chapter 29. Abingdon: Routledge.

Burnard, P. Holliday, C. Jasilek, S. Nikolova, A. (2014). Artists and higher education partnerships: A living enquiry. Education Journal, 4.3, 98-105. 

Grushka, K. (2005). Artists as reflective self‐learners and cultural communicators: an exploration of the qualitative aesthetic dimension of knowing self through reflective practice in art‐making. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 6.3, 353-366. doi: 10.1080/14623940500220111

Haas, J. (2003). The changing role of the curator. Anthropology, New Series, No. 36, Curators, Collections, and Contexts: Anthropology at the Field Museum, 1893-2002, 237-242. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29782683?seq=1&sid=21105716830753&uid=2134&uid=5910784&uid=2&uid=2129&uid=31173&uid=377736371&uid=3738032&uid=70&uid=3&uid=67#page_scan_tab_contents

MacDonald. C. (2009). Issues in curating contemporary art and performance. Contemporary Theatre Review, 19.2, 242-243. Retrieved from: http://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.northampton.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.1080/10486800902809651#.VLfiXFp4-RI

Stanley, P. (2015). Writing the PhD Journey(s): An Autoethnography of Zine-Writing, Angst, Embodiment, and Backpacker travels. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 44.2, 143-168.

By

Cognition in a digital artefact

In response to the workshop discussed in the recent post How does art speak to enable cognition? in which a group of trainee teachers discussed the meaning of aesthetic discourse in art education, I have created a Sway to respond to it. The Sway, which is a digital artefact, draws together fundamental thoughts from my own, students and academics perspectives on the term. In this post I will attempt to discuss how creating this digital artefact has engendered thinking around cognition. Aesthetic Discourse Sway

Digital artefacts as art forms:

As an art teacher what constitutes an art form can be a controversial issue, What is art? is an age old question which many educators have deliberated (Duncum and Bracey, 2001; Hickman, 2005; Fleming, 2012; Edwards 2014). In short the academics referred to here summarise art as a concept generated in the minds of people, that adapts over time and communicates meaning or expresses creative skill. If I relate this to the Sway created here one could suggest it is a creative form of expression in which I have shared the opinions of others, it is generated through the compilation of others ideas critically addressed in relation to my own. It is a tool of the present time, capturing multi-media content and expresses creative licence through the presentation of visual and textual forms. However, is it really art?

As Hickman and I address in The Sage Handbook of Curriculum Pedagogy and Assessment (2016), in our Chapter on Visual Art (Pages 343-358) the benefits of digital art tools are that creators can experience the cultures of others, generate new knowledge relevant to the time and diversify their practice building interdisciplinary bridges. These comments still resonate with my own practice, the digital tool Sway has enabled me to develop my own learning through engagement with a new tool, the beauty being that the tool is relevant to me as artist, teacher and researcher. I can visually present content with aesthetic control, as a teacher I can use the artefact as an interactive presentation device and as a researcher I have been able to gain feedback from those I share the outcomes of the work with. Of course this can also be achieved through more traditional artistic forms but digital artefacts can be edited multiple times with ease, shared socially in a quick time frame and can capture global commentary from others on the same platform within the same program.

Cognitive development through the creation of a digital artefact:

This particular digital artefact developed my cognition in the following ways, firstly it encouraged risk taking, I was reluctant albeit a little excited to create a piece of art on a digital program I had not encountered before. However, it was not without its small frustrations, although intuitive in terms of colour schemes I initially felt frustrated that I could not move objects around the screen with ease to reposition them in what I deemed to be more aesthetically pleasing way to the artist eye. This dilemma, enabled me to further understand how I think when engaging in art making (Sternberg and Sternberg, 2012). I intuitively expect to be able to maintain control over my own aesthetic output and when restricted build frustration. I became more consciously aware here of my own practice (Eisner, 2002) as an artist and a learner. In terms of cultural meaning (Efland, 2002) my awareness of digital presentation tools grew. I became equipped with a new tool to use in my own teaching, I like how the digital facility can bring in social media of our time, although I did not use the facility to embed tweets I can appreciate how this could be useful when presenting to my own students in future. I could generate discussion and set tasks that are relevant to live discussions taking place on social platforms, a new direction for university based academia, this tool alone will transform the way I teach. The tool also captures the movements of my mind (Sullivan 2005) particularly in relation to the format of the artwork, it utilises a scrolling technique similar to that on a blog page, allowing my thoughts to be organised and edited as they develop using multiple formats of transcognitive expression.

References:

Duncum, P. and Bracey, P. (2001). On Knowing: Art and Visual Culture. Christchurch: Canterbury University Press.

Edwards, J. (2014). Teaching Primary Art. Harlow: Pearson.

Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Efland, A. (2002). Art and cognition. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fleming, M. (2012). The Arts in Education. Abington: Routledge.

Hickman, R. (2005). What is art? Bristol: Intellect.

Hickman, R. and Heaton, R. (2016). Visual Art. The SAGE Handbook of Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment. London: SAGE

Sternberg, R. Sternberg, K. (2012) Cognition. (6th ed.) Canada: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

 

By

#EdDConf16

On 25th June 2016 Cambridge University EdD students collaborated to participate in the annual Education Doctoral conference. This years theme resonated around the concept of reflexivity. The thinglink below shares a research community contribution from participants in the Well-being and Creativity Research Group. I had the role of collating the groups contributions into this thinglink design to share our contributions during a presentation. In this post I will summarise the conference experience and will discuss how aspects of the conference resonate with my own research on cognition. 

Using the thinglink above I hoped to generate an artefact that would fuel aesthetic discourse around our groups key contributions. The artwork which hosts the groups content is a visual metaphor for our evolving EdD experience. All members of our group are on individual and collaborative research journeys, these journeys can be turbulent and frequently change direction, as a result of reflexivity the map like structure articulates this. Maps can be read or interpreted in different ways, you can take different routes to reach similar destinations and you can be influenced by people or experiences en route, this parallels with a doctorate. Different themes and events hold significance for each group member and these are shared through hotspots on the multimedia thinglink.

Conference Key Themes:

Word cloud

A few of the key concepts that were explored at the conference include: a) The meaning of reflexivity in a modern world, b) Reflexivity of the self, practice and professions and c) Physical and digital writing strategies. The word cloud above also depicts other themes discussed.

Professor Pat Thompson started the conference with a keynote concerning reflexive strategies in the contemporary world, a significant statement made was that we are all reflexive beings in todays life. Her presentation focused on how to deal with this in relation to research and how research can assist us in making informed choices about educational practice. The three images below further illuminate the messages touched upon.

Image one illuminates different forms of reflexivity, to contribute to this I am aware that reflexivity has been defined as a cause and effect process (Scott and Morrison, 2005) which can affect both the researcher and researched. When writing reflexively, through an artistic, poetic or as I believe technologic self, fluidity in research stories can be articulated (Reed-Danahay, 1997; Spry, 2001). This blog for example acts as an element of my personal reflexive self, in which as Pat Thompson suggests different modes of reflexivity may emerge. It would be interesting to analyse blog content in relation to reflexive forms to identify how I use this within my own research practice, an area in which the conference has evoked my thinking.

Image two moves the keynote story forward to consider how blogging the doctoral self contributes to the reflexive process. Suggestions made included scholary presence, knowledge sharing, the valuable nature of slow thought and pleasure. I can empathise with these ideas, blogging has enabled me to explore who I am as an art educator, this identity is still emerging. It  provides a platform to share thinking as it develops, enables a step back, self reflection and brings pleasure, if I’m honest tension also emerges-mainly in relation to what content or how much to share. But the ability to blog is proving so valuable to me as a multi-media tool to engage all components of myself: artist, teacher, researcher, learner, writer etc. in my doctoral story. To contribute to the consideration of how blogs can be used and analysed in higher education myself and colleague Helen Caldwell have recently published an article exploring this domain. Caldwell, H. and Heaton, R. (2016). The interdisciplinary use of blogs and communities in teacher education. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology. 33.3, 142-158. 

Image three determines a selection of the different categories doctoral blogs can come under, this led to discussions about how social media and a digital presence in general influences and impacts upon the doctoral self. Grushka (2007) discusses how exhibitions provide glimpses into artists’ worlds, enabling interpretations and reflections on the self and society whilst providing validation of self knowledge. As an artist and blogger, I feel this transcends across to my own discipline, if Joseph Beuys is correct stating we are all artists, then we are all able to exhibit our reflexive self, it is how we do this which becomes influential.

The messages shared in Professor Thompson’s keynote were revisited, revised and remodelled throughout the conference. EdD community groups presented, as identified in the thing link above, posters were shared and student presentations made. The conference became a web of connectivity and reinforced the value of reflexive collaboration in EdD journeys.

Conference Cognition:

In relation to how my own cognition developed through this experience I can honestly say that I am beginning to understand some of the ways in which I think (Sternberg and Sternberg, 2012), I am gaining awareness of my own consciousness as an art educator (Eisner, 2002). For example the narrative of this blog is helping me to make cognitive connections between my ideas whilst helping me to build an identity and awareness of my own culture and position in it. Learning connections are being made by writing and sharing digital content, this is fuelled by the reflexive process (Sullivan, 2005), I am capturing the movements of my mind in a two fold reflexive process by reflecting on experiences then reflecting upon these reflections. This strategy, which I have only just become aware of (an example of miscognition (Tavin, 2010) perhaps) is the entity which is helping me to understand how I am learning and engaging actively with my own transcognition (Sullivan, 2010).

References:

Caldwell, H. and Heaton, R. (2016). The interdisciplinary use of blogs and communities in teacher education. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology. 33.3, 142-158. 

Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Grushka, K. (2005). Artists as reflective self‐ learners and cultural communicators: an exploration of the qualitative aesthetic dimension of knowing self through reflective practice in art‐ making, Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 6:3, 353-366. DOI: 10.1080/14623940500220111

Reed-Danahay, D. (ed) (1997). Auto/ethnography: Rewriting the self and the social. Oxford: Berg.

Scott, D. and Morrison, M. (2006). Key ideas in educational research. London: Continuum.

Spry, T. (2001). Performing auto-ethnography: An embodied methodological praxis. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 706-732. Retrieved from: http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/6/706

Sternberg, R. Sternberg, K. (2012) Cognition. (6th ed.) Canada: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Sullivan, G. (2005, 2010). Art practice as research. (1st and 2nd eds.). London: SAGE

Tavin, K. (2010). Six acts of mis-cognition: Implications for art education. Studies in Art Education,52.1, 55-68.

 

By

How does art speak to enable cognition?

Whilst writing and researching towards my doctoral project I have been thinking about the different lenses in which we share data from. In this post I provide an insight into a number of recent experiences I have had as an art educator and attempt to address them from three specific lenses to show how art can speak, whilst enabling one to question their cognition. I will discuss each event from a theoretical position, a cultural one and a personal one. Theoretically I will address how the event demonstrated cognition, culturally how the event represented the practice of art educators and personally how the event impacted me.

Event 1: A workshop questioning the meaning of aesthetic discourse with third year undergraduate artist teachers.

As a component of my doctoral research I asked a group of artistic teachers about their opinions on the definition of aesthetic discourse and what it meant to them in order to arrive at a shared meaning of the term. The image below highlights some of the thoughts these artist teachers had.

IMG_3377

Theoretical lens: The image above models how the artist teachers engaged in a discussion about the meaning of aesthetic discourse, through this image we can see the artist teachers engaging in the act of transcognition, this term is defined on this blog post, the participants created the mind map to generate ideas, using the visual as a tool for thoughtful making, they use language to explore the notion of aesthetic discourse. The environment around them influenced the knowledge created, one way this happened was through engagement with others. The visual shown, or aesthetic discourse, captures as Suillivan (2005) recognised the transcognitive movements of the artists mind. Tavin (2007, p.40) determines aesthetic discourse to mean ‘thinking about, discussing and experiencing art in art education’ The artist teachers’ ideas resonate.

Cultural lens: I also consider this image from a cultural position, that of art educators. It is clear from comments made on the image, such as “Discussion is art” and “assessing understanding” that this group of art educators believe that aesthetic discourse is more than just a visual or aesthetic form. They identify it as a form of understanding where a relationship is formed between viewer and creator, this is interesting because in relation to the theory of transcognition these artist teachers show an awareness already that they may recognise thinking in a medium as  a component of aesthetic discourse, although this awareness of transcognition has not been made in a direct statement it can be deduced from analysing the visual. The comment, “explore, experiment explain” also suggests recognition of thinking in a language, a second component of transcognition and the use of terms “discussion,” “self-reflection” and “artist v’s viewer” points to the participants awareness that aesthetic discourse involves thinking in an individual and social context, the participants show this themselves visually by making arrows and line connections between different statements on the image. The image enables myself as a researcher to understand the cultural position of the art educators I am working with, this is useful information to possess when analysing data gathered because I can determine to what extent the art educators are using or already understand the terminology or practice of cognition. The image highlights the artist teachers may be aware of cognition, through statements such as “artistic cognition…”  “or cognition?” but that they do not necessarily understand how it is moving their thinking forward or that they can break cognition down into smaller components.

Personal lens: Thinking about writing from a personal lens is proving interesting, I can articulate my own interpretation of the workshop experience and image above sharing one angle. Personal experience also comes through in the theoretical and cultural viewpoints I have already shared because I am both writer and analyst, this reveals two more possible components to the artist teacher and researchers identity. When conducting the aesthetic discourse workshop with the doctoral research participants I believe I became more analytical of my own cognitive development. As I watched the participants creating their mind map about aesthetic discourse I drew connections between forms of cognition and the actions the participants undertook. For example, in relation to transcognition I could see that the participants were beginning to recognise the mind map they were creating as an outcome of aesthetic discourse, the visual was a thought generator it enabled language and discussion to be refocused and thoughts to be revisited, it facilitated the development of shared ideas, a key component of transcognition. This also revealed insights into how art can enable us to think in a language, beyond just seeing words on a page; art generates discussion and reflection a second component of transcognition. Participants through their discussions made references to their own contexts as artists and teachers using the visual as a springboard, the visual helped to illuminate contextual data about cognition, a third aspect of transcognition. This affirmed to me that there was a clear connection between cognition and aesthetic discourse, a component I wish to explore further in my doctoral study.

In this scenario, by using three lenses I model how visuals and the process of making them can portray voice. By using different lenses different discourses and stories can be created. Here they highlight the relationship between aesthetic discourse and cognition.

Event 2: Visiting a public installation.

As an art enthusiast I enjoy visiting contemporary art exhibitions, in particular I find public installations interesting because I find the decisions an artist makes to aid accessibility to their work fascinating, this artists’ act portrays part of the message being shared. I was lucky enough to experience the temporary exhibition commemorating The Battle of the Somme in Northern Hay Gardens in Exeter by artist Rob Heard recently and will express, again through multiple lenses how this experience influenced cognitive understanding.

Shrouds of the Somme, 2016, Rob Heard

Shrouds of the Somme, 2016, Rob Heard

Theoretical lens: The Battle of the Somme installation resonated with Eisner’s (2002) thoughts surrounding cognition in which he suggested that cognition is where one gains awareness of their surroundings or own consciousness. By experiencing the exhibit one begins to draw parallels with the experiences and surroundings of World War One soldiers, this is achieved physically through the expanse of figurative representations and emotionally through the realisation of the number of deaths. Through engagement with this exhibit, and art practice generally, one can increase their cultural meaning a definition of cognition shared by Efland (2002). In this exhibit this may occur through the impact and realisation of the number of victims involved in one of the bloodiest wars in history or through audience interaction in a modern day context. By thinking about this exhibit in relation to these theories of cognition, I am beginning to understand how I am learning, the activity itself is enabling me to interact with the exhibit on a deeper and more challenging level.

Cultural lens: As an art educator this could be a useful piece of artwork to engage with in relation to aesthetic discourse for a number of reasons, firstly because the artwork speaks through different mediums. The work has an auditory component, you can hear the voices of viewers interacting with the work whilst experiencing live performance sharing the names of soldiers who died on the first day of the Somme battle. Through this you can begin to understand how public installation can itself contain different forms of art to create one piece. In a kinaesthetic way the artwork comes alive through audience interaction, their is a sense of watching the devastation in front of you, this hints in a small way at the emotional shock many soldiers may have faced on the battlefield. Visually the expanse of white shared by the replica corpses in this piece creates impact by covering a vast expanse of land, this again becomes suggestive of the impact of one day of this war. Duncum (2007) identified that aesthetic discourse gains validity when it relates to contemporary life, this installation evokes questions about the wars and disputes we see in our contemporary world such as terrorism, this component of the work would be useful to share with other learners as it could be a way in to address both historical and modern day social, cultural and political constructs. There are other ways in which this artwork could be utilised by art educators which are not shared here, but I hope to demonstrate through this paragraph how this installation can provide a discourse for art educators to engage their students in thinking about art.

Personal lens: On a personal level this artwork evoked emotions around loss, as a new mother I began to interact with the work in relation to my own personal circumstance envisaging what it must have been like, in an empathetic way, for the families of the soldiers involved in this conflict. I gained realisation here that my own awareness of cognition has changed not only because of my academic awareness of cognition but also because of changes in my own personal circumstances, I read the artwork in a different way as a new mother. Before this life event my interpretation would probably have been different.This led me to think that every individual interacts with art in a different way, we all create our own aesthetic discourse with the art we interact with, the experiences we encounter in our lives shape the aesthetic discourse we have with artworks. Through writing this narrative and experiencing this installation I believe I have engaged in miscognition (Tavin, 2010), I did not recognise my own cognitive development in the moment of experiencing the work of art but on reflection later, through writing this narrative I have begun to articulate and understand that my awareness of aesthetic discourse has moved forward.

Event 3: External Examining for a UK University.

Whilst engaging in a different art educator’s role I was lucky enough to observe trainee primary teachers on their final placement, this experience influenced cognitive thoughts about my own practice as an artist teacher.

IMG_3549

Theoretical lens: When observing one teacher she had cleverly used a washing line to display her pupil’s research into a range of artists, instantly this resonated with the concept of transcognition (Sullivan, 2005), this research was capturing the movements of the young artists minds, the essence of transcognition. The next lesson then allowed the pupils to use this work as a stimuli for future art practice, the pupils could develop their own cognition through connectionism and this would be evident to the teacher through the extent to which the children could use or articulate their prior research. Observing this scenaio, modelled how having an awareness of cognitive development could translate back into the classroom.

Cultural lens: By walking into the classrooms of different artist teachers I became aware cognition can develop through the visual entities you encounter and your understanding of what constitutes an aesthetic discourse can grow. Whilst external examining I saw a number of ideas that will act as stimuli to develop practice. For example, a washing line displaying children’s research into a range of artists made me draw parallels with my own learning experiences for trainee teachers. A number of ways art educators could use the seemingly simple technique of a washing line could be to display aesthetic discourse: as a working wall, a research line, or a gallery space to name a few ideas. This experience, a small entity in the external examiners role, has impacted my own cognition as an art educator and will now be shared with other art teachers. The experience modelled new ways that learning could occur and cognitive connections could be made.

Personal lens: I was consciously aware when external examining that my own cognition was developing, the experience was sparking new ideas for my own classroom practice, it was enabling me to be reflective, share thoughts and ideas with others and encounter new environments. I was consciously aware I was making connections in artistic ideas, enabling my own learning, yet the most prolific catalyst to this was social interaction with others. Discussion enabled the articulation of aesthetic discourse, artistic ideas had a position to be vocalised and questioned. The aesthetic discourse was not always about a physical artwork, but a conversation or action. Lim’s (2004) research also recognises aesthetic discourse occurs in action. In Sullivan’s  trans-cognitive approach to knowing he identifies knowing can be integrated between the process of art making, the artwork itself and the viewers mind, I agree with this sentiment as this is what occurred during the external examining experience. But for this transcognitive approach to be realised by the learner social interaction may be required. Of course Sullivan could be suggesting social interaction occurs through the process of art making, this was observed when children were using artist research displayed on a washing line to draw links and build cognitive connections with their most recent art practice. But because of the significance social interaction appears to make in cognitive development and aesthetic discourse its position requires elevation.

Conclusion: By writing about art educator experiences from different lenses a range of ways art can speak have been modelled. Aesthetic discourse appears to move beyond the visual, it can occur consciously and unconsciously and can be realised most powerfully when shared socially. Engaging in an aesthetic discourse can highlight how cognition can occur and develop in art education, as in this blog post. By writing through multiple lenses one can begin to understand how cognitive development is a complex process which involves creating a web of connections between experiences in order to move thinking and learning on.

References:

Duncum, P. (2007). Nine Reasons for the Continuing Use of an Aesthetic Discourse in Art Education, Art Education, 60:2, 46-51

Efland, A. (2002). Art and cognition. New York: Teachers College Press.

Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Lim, B. (2004). Aesthetic discourses in early childhood settings: Dewey, Steiner, and Vygotsky, Early Child Development and Care, 174.5, 473-486, DOI:10.1080/0300443032000153633

Sullivan, G. (2005, 2010). Art practice as research. (1st and 2nd eds.). London: SAGE

Tavin, K. (2007.) Eyes Wide Shut: The Use and Uselessness of the Discourse of Aesthetics in Art Education, Art Education, 60:2, 40-45.

Tavin, K. (2010). Six acts of mis-cognition: Implications for art education. Studies in Art Education,52.1, 55-68.

 

By

Specificity in doctoral writing

Transcognition and miscognition exist when art educators curate thought

The headline above intends to be specific about the focus of my doctoral study. Capturing the essence of a 5 year study in one headline is not an easy endeavour. Yet to be specific in your doctoral writing is essential to keep the reader focused, to show your own academic confidence and to add specificity to your writing. These were key messages that hit home after attending Karen Littleton’s and Pam Burnard’s session on writing tools and practices at Cambridge University on 2nd June 2016.

Why is academic confidence important in doctoral writing?

When writing a doctorate you are narrating a story, you have experienced this piece of research whole heartedly so it needs to be told in this manner. You choose elements of the story to share so it is necessary to be confident when retelling this, obviously stories can be told in multiple ways, so adding justification to your choice can help to articulate why you told this particular story. Retelling it through different lenses, for example the theoretical, cultural or personal, can also help to identify your confidence showing how you understand multiple perspectives on your own research.

Other ways you can show confidence include providing specific signposts in your work, writing with authority, explaining choices, being specific about which concepts to foreground and background and expressing confidence in your own knowledge exchange. With all of these components to think about it is no wonder writing can seem like a daunting process. However this particular writing session led me to realise that we all narrate in our own way, that ‘writing’ or ‘narrating’ research comes in many forms and what is most important is confident expression of voice, particularly important in autoethnography, my own form of research.

Which voice will narrate your story?

Along with lenses the expression of different voices can also help demonstrate confidence, it can show your ability as a researcher to address your research from different perspectives, make connections between your findings and increase accessibility. Again though, you need to be specific about why these particular voices were chosen to articulate your understanding. When you establish a writing position readers are more able to reflect on personal experiences in relation to yours (Sparkes, 1996).

I see the role of art educators as multifaceted, I could therefore have a voice as an artist, teacher and researcher and could articulate my research journey from each of these standpoints. Voicing autoethnographic research from these perspectives enables my experiences to be related to the cultural context of the art educator (Richardson, 2000), other ways I attempt to achieve this is by telling my story in relation to that of other art educators using participatory research and by using art as a medium to articulate. The gallery below demonstrates some examples of how I have been using visuals and journalling to express a research voice, to act as an artist and to identify myself as a learner.

Another way of considering voice is to think about at which point in time you are articulating your research, are you responding to scenario’s and experiences that occur? or are you are looking back? One could suggest you are being reflexive if adopting these practices creating cause and effect scenarios (Scott and Morrison, 2006). Reflexivity is powerful because it can also engender action (Suillivan, 2005) changing the direction of research.

The role of specificity: 

With research outputs judged on originality, significance and rigour, being specific is essential to make claims and valuable contributions. It is easy as a doctoral researcher to go off tangent, there are always interesting avenues to explore. But writing in relation to your own focus and defending this is key to tightening research stories and demonstrating confidence, Karen Littleton explained. In my own research I attempt to achieve this by mobilising theory around cognition in an art educators practice. For example if I reflect on this post I have mentioned the notion of reflexivity in my artwork helping the articulation of my own learning and thinking, I could be exemplifying here how I am utilising the symptoms and sinthomes of miscognition (Tavin, 2010) because the artwork and blog narration I have created has unconsciously enabled me to create new knowledge about my own research experiences in an unconscious way. I could also suggest this post is enabling me to think about my own writing practices as a doctoral researcher by exemplifying how I am using the transcognitive processes of thinking through a medium, language and context (Suillivan, 2005) because the multi-media blog is enabling me to share the mediums of my practice to model thinking. I am using written and visual languages to articulate and the blog itself is a cultural context for other art educators to interact with. I exemplify here the importance of specificity to make research relevant, focused and rigourous. This leads me back to my opening headline for this post, I have attempted to exemplify here some small ways that transcognition and miscognition exist when I, the art educator, curate thought.

References:

Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of Inquiry. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Scott, D. and Morrison, M. (2006). Key ideas in educational research. London: Continuum.

Sparkes, A. (1996). The fatal flaw: A narrative of the fragile body-self. Qualitative Inquiry, 2.4, 463-494.

Sullivan, G. (2005). Art practice as research. (1st and 2nd eds.). London: SAGE

Tavin, K. (2010). Six acts of mis-cognition: Implications for art education. Studies in Art Education, 52.1, 55-68.

Skip to toolbar