The Problem of Authorship: Considering the Significance of Interpretative Approaches on the Conditions for Creativity in Undergraduate Fine Art Studio Practice
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The problem of authorship: Considering the significance of interpretative approaches on the conditions for creativity in undergraduate fine art studio practice By Dina Zoe BELLUIGI A thesis submitted in requirement of the award of Doctorate of Philosophy Kingston University Supervisors: Prof Bernadette Blair and Ms Ann Hulland January 2015 Abstract Varying approaches to interpretation, debated in aesthetic and literary criticism since the very beginnings of philosophy, favour the artist’s (author’s) intentionality, the viewer’s (reader’s) interpretation, and/or the artwork (text) itself. The merit of these approaches, in terms of what informs the artwork’s meaning or significance, is not at issue in this research project. Rather this project is concerned with how these different approaches play out within referential frameworks in teaching, learning and assessment interactions in higher education, and their significance for creativity in fine art studio practice. To comprehend the complex interplay of structure, culture and agency, the study draws from qualitative case studies of two art schools, in England and in South Africa, which differed in their espoused approach to assessment and interpretation. In addition, comparative case analysis of five studio practice teachers and their students considers agential approaches to interpretation and their significance for student engagement. Data was collected from course documentation and generated utilising a variety of hybrid methods. This included observations of assessments, questionnaires and interviews with staff; and to generate data from students, an image-based narrative method, focus group interviews and questionnaires. At various points during such researcher-participant interactions, possibilities for reciprocality, transgression and challenge of interpretations were enabled. Utilising critical discourse analysis, each case was analysed individually and then comparatively. Firstly, that which was espoused and practiced by staff was mapped to a framework constructed for the purpose of identifying approaches to interpretation: whether eucharistic, objective, or operative criticism, in relation to the author, text and reader. Secondly, insights from staff and student participants were related to the optimal conditions for creativity in this domain. Schema of the environment, relationships and curricula were then sketched, indicating the significance of interpretative approaches on students’ emotional, critical and reflective engagement with themselves as artist-students, their artmaking processes, and their artworks. This project contributes to research in assessment in fine art studio practice by providing a means to both identify the discipline’s embedded referential frameworks and consider their significance for creativity. The findings from this study revealed that whether or not the interpretative community of assessors were informed by educational development or quality assurances discourses, or utilised explicit criterion-referenced assessment, the more powerful and implicit discourses were those of their professional practice, informed by art criticism. As such, actual intentionality was not given Page ii prominence in either institution’s summative assessments. Despite this, its importance for the nominal authenticity of the artist-student emerged. As students’ reflective engagement of assessors’ readings of their artworks against their own meaning-making was unsupported, students evidenced underdeveloped skills of metacognition and critical judgment. However, the study found that those teachers with longer experience, of the particularity of institutional structures and cultures, had developed the capacity to better manage the effects on their students’ formative experiences. Such relationships emerged as having a strong formative influence. Those students, who believed their teacher was concerned with their actual intentionality, experienced less alienation and felt better supported to persevere with or problematize their desires, and to handle uncertainty. An argument is made for the negotiation of interpretation as discursive and inclusive of students’ actual intentionality in assessment practices in fine art studio practice. This turn, to situating the author within interpretation, is towards enabling possibilities of agency and the responsibility of ethics within teaching, learning and assessment of reflexive practitioners. In questioning the significance of interpretation on authorship and the conditions for creativity within the higher education context, of which there has been little in the way of empirical research, this research contributes to contemporary literary and aesthetic criticism. Page iii Table of contents The problem of authorship: Considering the significance of interpretative approaches on the conditions for creativity in undergraduate fine art studio practice i Abstract ii Table of contents v Table of interpretative frameworks x Table of schema xi Table of visual narratives xi Table of figures xii Acknowledgements xiii Chapter One Introducing this study 1 Chapter Two A consideration of the problematics of context: assessment in fine art studio practice 6 Part I. The struggle over content: curricula of fine art studio practice 6 Part II. Contemporary structures and cultures of assessment in fine art studio practice 10 Contemporary assessment methods in fine art studio practice 10 Dominant purposes of assessment in FASP 12 Referential frameworks for assessment in FASP 13 Traditions of assessment 15 Roles and agency in assessment 19 The significance of assessment for the conditions for creativity 21 Part III. The problematics of interpretation and judgment in FASP 23 Intentionality and art education 24 Conclusion 27 Chapter Three A consideration of the significance of interpretation for authorship and creativity 29 Part I. The significance of dominant philosophical constructions for authorship in the Twentieth century 29 Part II. A framework to map approaches to interpretation 37 Part III. Approaches to interpretation 40 Chapter Four A discussion of the politics, pragmatics and problematics of the methodology of this study 43 Part I. The politics of my research paradigm 44 Page v Part II. The pragmatics of my research methodology 47 (Con)text: discourse and mis-reading 47 A framework for mapping interpretative approaches 47 A schema to analyse the conditions for creativity in FASP 50 Selecting the cases, sites, sources and methods 52 Academic literature 55 Curricula documents 55 Observations 56 Generating data from staff participants 56 Generating data from student participants 57 Part III. Concluding with a problematic of authorship 60 Chapter Five An analysis of the significance of institutional interpretative approaches on the conditions for creativity 64 Part I. Contextualising the schools 64 Formal curricula 68 Constructions of learning 71 Part II. UKI institutional analysis 77 Constructions of authorship 77 A. Mapping interpretative approaches, UKI 78 Assessment at UKI 78 Formative assessments 79 Student expectations created from such assessments 83 Summative assessments 83 The role of supervisor in summative assessments 84 Curriculum structures: Analysing the assessment of the two modules 87 The Studio Practice module 87 The Exhibition/Portfolio and Professional Development module 90 Moderation practices 93 Internal moderation 93 External examination 95 Conclusion to mapping interpretative approaches of UKI 96 B. Conditions for creativity 98 Constructions of the staff 100 Constructions of the student 102 Student engagement 104 Page vi Alienation 106 Engagement 111 Concluding this analysis of UKI: The problem of authorship 119 Part III. SAI institutional analysis 121 Constructions of authorship 121 A. Mapping interpretative approaches, SAI 122 Assessment at SAI 122 Formative assessments 122 The supervisors’ interpretative approaches 126 Student expectations created from such assessments 128 Summative assessments 129 Moderation practices 133 External examination 134 Conclusion to mapping interpretative approaches at SAI 134 B. Conditions for creativity 135 Constructions of the staff 137 Constructions of the student 139 Student engagement 142 Alienation 143 Engagement 150 Concluding this analysis of SAI: The problem of authorship 157 Comparing the significance of institutional interpretative approaches on the conditions for creativity 158 Chapter Six An analysis of the significance of individual approaches to interpretation on the conditions for creativity 164 Comparing individual interpretative approaches within panel assessments 164 Comparing formative interpretative approaches in the studio 175 1. A. Mapping Adam’s interpretative approach 178 Analysing Adam’s interpretative practice 179 B. The conditions for creativity 182 Characteristics of the learning environment 183 Student engagement 184 2. A. Mapping Faye’s interpretative approach 190 Analysing Faye’s interpretative practice 191 Page vii B. The conditions for creativity 194 Characteristics of the learning environment 194 Student engagement 196 3. A. Mapping Helena’s interpretative approach 202 Analysing Helena’s interpretative practice 204 B. The conditions for creativity 206 Characteristics of the learning environment 207 Student engagement 209 4. A. Mapping Nick’s interpretative approach 215 Analysing Nick’s interpretative practice 217 B. The conditions for creativity 218 Characteristics of the learning environment 219 Student engagement 220 5. A. Mapping Sophie’s interpretative