Prof. Robin Nelson,University of London (CSSD)

Practice as Research

Interlocking Spheres

Artsworld

Academic sphereMedia sphere

PaR

Accents on “research”

personal research – finding out, and sifting, what is known

professional research – networking, finding sources and collating information

academic research – conducting a research inquiry to establish new knowledge

Research outcomes

new knowledge

‘substantial new insights’

achievements of PaR initiative

established: that arts or media practices may

constitute academic research media or artworks may be submitted

as substantial evidence of research modes of presentation of arts or

media research which map on to more traditional methods

PaR Research Submission

is likely to include: a product (exhibition, film, blog, score,

performance) with a durable record (DVD, CD, video)

documentation of process (sketchbook, photographs, DVD)

“complementary writing” which includes locating practice in a lineage of influences and a conceptual framework for the research

Why misunderstandings?

misplaced sense that all devised pieces are “original” (in the sense of fresh articulations) but may not be original in research insight

misplaced assumption that the maker’s investigation is always self-evident in the product

adjustments

specify a research inquiry at the outset

build moments of critical reflection into timeline

in documenting process, capture moments of insight

locate your praxis in lineage of similar practices

relate specific inquiry to broader contemporary debate (references)

methodology

Artistic process more akin to creative play than linear rational argument BUT play can have an equivalent rigour in respect of:

imaginative creation of material selection and composition rigorous editing

© Prof. Robin Nelson (revised 15 Feb 2010)

Dynamic Model for “Practice as Research"

PRAXIS

theory imbricated within practice

Know-how

Performer knowledge Tacit knowledge

Embodied knowledge (Phenomenological)

experience

Know what

Critical reflection Explicit knowledge

Practitioner ‘action research’

Know that

Conceptual framework Cognitive ‘academic’

knowledge Spectatorship studies Location in a lineage Audience research

100 % Practice?

the answer depends on your understanding of knowledge and its dissemination

if you go with requirement for “research orientation” demonstrating process and method, it is unlikely that this can be evident in the product alone which cannot articulate its own context

What is the difference between a traditional PhD and a PaR PhD?

Deeply traditional:• a contribution to knowledge and understanding in those subjects where the “scientific method” can be applied in reasonably direct form

Today’s PaR:• a contribution to knowledge and understanding in any subject (including practice-based subjects)

Enrolment issues

ensure clear agreement in writing about available facilities and times of access

ensure institution’s regulations can embrace your project

check that application does not require “scientific method”

ensure supervisor is prepared to observe and feed back on process

Process issues

build reading and reflection time into your work schedule

map your conceptual framework since the “field” of inquiry may spill across several disciplines

avoid undertaking several PhDs think in advance about documentation

(including viewer response) and build this into your timescale and budget

Examination issues

examiners need to be appointed in advance of usual timescales since they need access to the product

examiners need to be sympathetic to PaR and prepared to visit twice

try to avoid long gap between showing of the work and the written submission/viva

UoA65 “evidence”

“evidence is taken to mean that which makes manifest the research content and imperatives of the submission” (#13)

Researchers should submit such evidence as they deem necessary… (#13)

submission of evidence

[artwork as output] “may be submitted alone where it is deemed to constitute sufficient evidence of the research in itself” ( #13 a)

…recommended that a statement of up to 300 words is submitted… where the research imperatives and the research significance … might further be made evident (#13b)

submission of evidence (contd.)

Portfolio: an evidence box of materials deemed to assist the sub-panel may be identified… (#13c)

[sub-panel will] “assess outputs against the three indicators of excellence (significance, originality and rigour’) (# 14)

conclusion

an art or media work (or other praxis)may exceptionally stand on its own as a research outcome judged by peer review

arts or media practices and processes may demonstrate critical rigour and even make arguments

substantial insights may emerge through play between aspects of process