PROPOSAL!
Assessment Description
Learning Outcome 1 is assessed through a seven to ten-minute recorded presentation that
features talking and visuals (still or moving image) and/or sound and is delivered by you
individually.
Your video should demonstrate and share a strong sense of your context and what makes it
complex and connected.
There will be significant overlap between this presentation and the work you produce for
the practice briefs as well as your independent activity. However, only the recorded
presentation receives summative assessment for Unit 1
IDEAS
(On the presentation)
When writing your proposal, ask yourself the following questions and use the various boxes to organise your thinking:
- What ideas/interests are most relevant to me and how do these reflect my values?
- How does this project build on and/or depart from my previous work (creative or other)?
- Is my project feasible in the scope of my part-time MA? Consider, e.g. what the project aims to achieve. No artist can fully engage with huge issues such as ‘truth’, ‘society’ or ‘culture’. Be selective, close some doors. Declare your commitments as an aim that is supported by several objectives.
- What is my field? What do I already know in this context and how will I deepen this knowledge and understanding through my research and/as cultural production? (e.g. primary research – visits to archives, libraries, galleries, museum collections, experimenting with new techniques, etc.)
- What does this project need to come to fruition? What is required of me as a person/practitioner to support this becoming?
IN THIS 1000-1200 WORD ESSAY NCLUDE:
- Your name and the working title of your project
- Summarise your research question and rationale (50-100 words): What do you want to discover and why?
- What steps do you need to take to achieve your aim and objectives?
- What practice-based/led and other methods will you use and why?
- Influences/context(s): Which artists/designers/curators/performers/musicians/theorists/ philosophers/economists/geographers and so on who are key to your enquiry? (Your list should feature at least ten cultural producers. You may only reference two or three in proposal while featuring others in your bibliography.)
- Identify what your project might need in terms of resources, materials and support. (Use bullet points to respond to this question).
- Provide a bibliography of sources that are relevant to your research. (Begin with an indicative ten sources – a combination of artworks, articles, books, papers, projects, websites, etc. [use Harvard referencing – see Cite Them Right (linked below)]. This list is something you will add to, continually.)
IDEA VOMIT
who am i
what do i do.
place
land
add people who are in cy in the video ( FILM STUFF IN CYPRYS)
use phone
talk in greek and use subtitles?
HOW MY CONTEXT IS COMPLEX AND SHOW MY NETWORK OF RELATIONSHIPS AND ENVIRONMENT.
philosophise my own perception of life
explore life like an outsider
WHAT IS MY PROCESS AS A CYPRIOT WOMAN
ARTIST
EMOTIONAL
GENUINE
SENSITIVE
FAMILY ORIENTED PERSON
MAYBE show the difference in lifestyle at home and here
THE DUALITY OF LEAVING HOME AND WANTING TO GO BACK BUT NOT WANTING TO LIVE THERE FOREVER
THE WARMTH OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY AND EVEN FOOD AND WEATHER
tHE LACK OF RECOGNITION AS AN ARTIST
SEXISM
I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE A NARRATED VIDEO! (EMMA CHAMBERLAIN STYLE)
sacrifice one lifestyle for the other.
I work and study online- USA QATAR CYPRUS LONDON
A SPLIT EXISTENCE
AN INTERCULTURAL LIFE. EVEN WITHOUT TRAVEL!!!
DIY search:
Liz Lerman’s Critical Response ProcessSM
NOTES:
Liz Lerman evolved a new approach to group critique on artistic works in progress. Critical Response Process is a 4 method that emphasises the values dialogue and the opportunity for artists to exercise a degree of control in the criticism directed al their work.
INTERVIEW BY NANCY STARK SMITH- ON- LIZ LERMAN(Choreographer).
this CRITICAL RESPONSE PROCESS- has 3 roles & 4 steps
THE 3 ROLES:
- artist – OFFERS WORK IN PROGRESS FOR REVIEW
- responders- COMITTED TO SUPPORTING THE ARTIST AND ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE
- facilitator- INITIATES EACH STEP- KEEPS THE PROCESS ON TRACK- WORKS TO HELP THE ARTIST AND RESPONDERS TO USE THEIR TIME WITH FRUITFUL Q AND As.
NOW THE 4 STEPS:
STEP1: statements of meaning
Facilitator creates a space that will help artists see that what they have created touch/ influences another human being.
ASK
-what was stimulating? how did u feeL? what meaning do u make of what u saw?
how do you interpret what u saw? what was compelling for u?
STEP ONE ISNT ABOUT JUST ASKING FOR AFFIRMATIONS BUTTTTTT IT SHOULD BE FRAMED POSITIVELY 100%
STEP2: artist as Questioner
The creator asks quesions.
The more they clarify their focus the deeper the dialogue.
Facilitator may help probe the artist to dig deeper.
STEP3: Neutral Questions from Responders
Responders ask Artist informational/ factual questions.
it can help, wben first introducing ihe Process, for the facilitator to lead the group
in practicing how to form neutral questions in response to a hypothetical work of
art (not the piece under review)
Neutral questions example: What kind of texture were u going for??
STEP4: permissioned opinions
Facilitator invites opinions.
responders first name topic of the opinion and the artist gives permission on wether or not they should state it.
” I HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT___________ WOULD U LIKE TO HEAR IT”
What I experience
is that people get
up from Critical
Response and they
cannot wait to go
back into the studio.
That is my definition
of good feedback.
—Liz Lerman
DIY Search:
Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life- Marshall B. RosenbergNonviolent Communication (NVC) is a communication and conflict resolution process developed by Marshall B. Rosenberg in the 1960s. It is often referred to as “compassionate communication” and is designed to help people communicate more effectively, express their needs and feelings, and resolve conflicts in a nonviolent and empathetic manner. NVC is based on the idea that the way we communicate can either foster understanding and connection or contribute to misunderstanding and conflict.
The key components of Nonviolent Communication are:
- Observation: NVC encourages individuals to make clear, objective, and nonjudgmental observations about a situation. Observations are distinct from evaluations, as they focus on what is actually happening rather than offering subjective interpretations.
- Feelings: NVC emphasizes identifying and expressing one’s feelings associated with a particular situation. This helps individuals connect with their emotions and communicate them to others.
- Needs: NVC highlights the importance of recognizing and articulating one’s needs and the needs of others. Understanding and expressing these needs can help in creating a common ground for addressing conflicts.
- Requests: NVC promotes making clear and concrete requests rather than demands. A request is a specific, actionable expression of how one would like a need to be met. It leaves room for negotiation and collaboration.
The ultimate goal of NVC is to facilitate empathetic communication and to build connections between people, even in challenging or conflict-ridden situations. It can be used in various contexts, including personal relationships, professional settings, and conflict resolution efforts. NVC is often applied in mediation, therapy, and communication training.
The process of NVC encourages active listening, empathy, and a focus on common human needs as a way to bridge the gap between individuals with differing viewpoints. By applying the principles of NVC, people can better understand one another, find common ground, and work together to meet their shared needs while respecting individual differences.
Nonviolent Communication has been influential in the fields of conflict resolution, psychology, and communication and has been used in diverse settings to promote better understanding and collaboration.
DIY Search:
There were a lot of sources and articles to read but here is my summaey of what you may read online on the topic of ” the practise of giving feedback”
The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching is an essential aspect of education. Effective feedback can help educators enhance their teaching skills and, in turn, improve the learning experience for students. Here are some key points related to giving effective feedback to improve teaching:
- Constructive and Specific Feedback: Effective feedback is constructive and specific. Rather than vague or overly critical comments, feedback should offer clear suggestions for improvement. For example, instead of saying, “Your lecture was boring,” you might say, “Incorporating more interactive elements into your lecture could make it more engaging.”
- Timeliness: Feedback is most effective when it is delivered in a timely manner. It’s important to provide feedback shortly after the observed teaching session so that the details are fresh in the teacher’s mind.
- Goal-Oriented: Effective feedback should be aligned with specific goals and objectives. Teachers and evaluators should have a shared understanding of what is expected in terms of teaching quality.
- Focusing on Strengths and Weaknesses: Feedback should acknowledge both the strengths and weaknesses in a teacher’s performance. Recognizing what a teacher is doing well can be just as important as addressing areas that need improvement.
- Engagement and Interaction: Encouraging engagement and interaction in the classroom is often a key component of effective teaching. Feedback may address how a teacher manages class discussions, encourages student participation, and creates an interactive learning environment.
- Incorporating Student Feedback: Student feedback can be a valuable source of information. While students may not have expertise in teaching, their perspectives on the learning experience can provide insights into the effectiveness of a teacher’s methods.
- Professional Development: Effective feedback should be seen as a part of ongoing professional development. It should be a tool for growth and improvement, rather than a judgment or critique.
- Tailored Feedback: Feedback should be tailored to the individual teacher’s needs and the context of the classroom. What works for one teacher or class may not work for another, so feedback should be personalized.
- Reflective Practice: Encouraging teachers to reflect on their own teaching is a valuable part of the feedback process. Self-reflection can lead to meaningful improvements.
- Encouraging a Growth Mindset: Effective feedback should promote a growth mindset, where teachers see challenges as opportunities for development rather than fixed limitations.
In summary, the practice of giving feedback to improve teaching should be a thoughtful and supportive process that helps teachers enhance their skills and create more effective and engaging learning environments for their students. It’s a collaborative effort between educators and evaluators aimed at continuous improvement.
VIDEO:
Our next task is to watch a video= A documentary on giving constructive feedback!
Ask yourself: What might a lite version of this entail if you only had 15 minutes to provide a cohort with feedback on the work-in-progress they’re developing for your MA?
darn
READ:
Bolt, B. (2016) ‘Artist Research: A Performative Paradigm’, Parse (3)NOTES:
Artistic research, as discussed by Barbara Bolt, likely explores the idea that artistic practice itself can be a form of research. This approach challenges traditional notions of research, which are often text-based and theoretical, by considering artistic practice as a valid way of generating knowledge and understanding.
In a performative paradigm of artistic research, the emphasis is on the act of creating, performing, or exhibiting art as a form of research inquiry.
This means that the art-making process is not just a means to an end (the artwork) but is, in itself, a way of exploring and generating new insights.
This approach blurs the boundaries between artistic creation and research, suggesting that art is a way of asking questions, experimenting, and investigating ideas. It values the performative aspect of art, where the process of creating and presenting the work is seen as a form of communication and a source of knowledge.
Barbara Bolt’s work likely delves deeper into these ideas and their implications for the field of art and academic research. If you are interested in the specific details and arguments presented in her article, I would recommend accessing the article directly through academic sources or libraries.
IN DETAIL
the idea of “performativity” in the arts, particularly in contemporary discussions around visual and performing arts. This concept suggests that all art is inherently performative, meaning it does something or creates an effect. This shift in thinking has been called the “performative turn.”
The author differentiates between “performance” and “performativity.” While performance refers to deliberate acts in art, performativity focuses on the repetitive nature of art creation. Art practice is seen as a repetitive process that enacts or produces “art” as its effect. This repetitiveness conceals the conventions of art.
t artistic research can be seen through the lens of performativity, where repetition and iteration are central to understanding how “the new” emerges in art. It’s a different way of thinking about artistic practice and research compared to traditional qualitative and quantitative research.
The text EMPHASIZES the differences in how art and science establish “truth claims.” In scientific research, truth is based on objective measurements and calculations, leading to replicable results. Artistic research, on the other hand, is often seen as subjective and not easily replicable, making it challenging to conform to scientific standards.
The text also explores the concept of performativity, which focuses on the idea that artistic research doesn’t merely describe something but actively does something in the world. It argues that the effects of artistic research are multi-dimensional, including changes in material practice, methodology, and audience experiences. The performative aspect of art has the power to transform how we perceive the world, and the text suggests that it should be valued and assessed differently from traditional scientific research.
The author contends that artistic research should not be measured solely by scientific standards of replicability and objectivity but should be evaluated based on its unique transformative impact on the art world and beyond.