The periodic review went very well, with commendations for the quality of our documentation and the enthusiasm of the course team, which was nice. We had a couple of minor technical conditions, which have been swiftly fixed, and only one significant recommendation – to clarify the learning outcomes in relation to the learning agreement. This ties in nicely with the upcoming changes to the academic framework, which will see all courses reduce the number of learning outcomes per module to a maximum of 4, and reduce the number of course learning outcomes to a maximum of 6. It has also provided a window of opportunity to squeeze something into the module learning outcomes to address the issue of tutorial engagement (or the lack of it for some students). In the previous module outcomes, we referred to ‘appropriate academic contexts’. We’ve now narrowed this down to ‘tutorials’ to remove any wriggle room, and to link tutorial engagement directly to assessment. We’ve kept the more generic term in the course outcomes, but inside the actual modules, there’s no confusion about what we mean.
Here are the final learning outcomes for the BA Hons Graphic Arts & Design course at Leeds Metropolitan University:
Course Learning Outcomes
On successful completion the BA Hons Graphic Arts & Design course, a graduate is able to:
1. Integrate practical and theoretical skills in the production and presentation of a consolidated body of work.
2. Negotiate, create and present a coherent, sustainable, individually appropriate and critically informed body of work.
3. Articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes within appropriate academic and professional contexts.
4. Locate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional and technical contexts.
Learning Outcomes – Level Six
On successful completion of Level Six, the student is able to:
1. Integrate practical and theoretical skills in the production and presentation of a consolidated body of practical work and an Extended Learning Agreement.
2. Negotiate, create and present a coherent, sustainable, individually appropriate and critically informed body of practical work and an Extended Learning Agreement.
3. Reflect upon their learning, and articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes in tutorials and through an Extended Learning Agreement.
4. Locate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional and technical contexts, and articulate their understanding of these contexts in tutorials and through an Extended Learning Agreement.
Learning Outcomes – Level Five
On successful completion of Level Five, the student is able to:
1. Integrate practical and theoretical skills in the production and presentation of a consolidated body of practical work and a Learning Agreement.
2. Negotiate, create and present an individually appropriate and critically informed body of practical work and a Learning Agreement.
3. Reflect upon their learning, and articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes in tutorials and through a Learning Agreement.
4. Locate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional and technical contexts, and articulate their understanding of these contexts in tutorials and through a Learning Agreement.
5. Understand the broad range of processes that constitute graphic arts and design.
6. Embrace ambiguity, uncertainty and unfamiliarity in relation to their individual creative practice.
Learning Outcomes – Level Four
On successful completion of Level Four, the student is able to:
1. Integrate practical and theoretical skills in the production of a negotiated practical project and a first Learning Agreement.
2. Develop and apply practical skills in the creation and presentation of a body of self-directed practical work.
3. Work independently and assume responsibility for their own learning.
4. Reflect upon their learning, and articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes in tutorials and through a first Learning Agreement.
5. Locate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional and technical contexts, and articulate an understanding of these contexts in tutorials and through a first Learning Agreement.
6. Undertake a theoretical approach to study.
7. Research and analyse the work of others within a critical account.
8. Produce of a reasoned argument that interrogates and interprets selected examples of visual culture.
9. Resolve collaborative and developmental studio briefs using a range of techniques, processes and materials.
10. Demonstrate awareness of the broad range of approaches that constitute graphic arts and design.
11. Understand the course philosophy.
12. Understand which support services, facilities and learning technologies are available, and be competent in their use.
Tuesday 5 April 2011
Wednesday 16 March 2011
Learning outcomes v1.0
OK. On the off-chance that someone is still reading this infrequently updated blog, here is the end point of the quest to re-write the BA Hons Graphic Arts & Design course at Leeds Met. This is the juicy bit from the 200 pages of documentation that we have written over the last few months:
_______________________________________
Background and philosophy
In accordance with the aims of the course, the curriculum strategy provides, through an integrated approach to theory and practice, opportunities for multidisciplinary and specialist activity. Through the study and practice of graphic arts and design, students develop a comprehensive understanding of the wider social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts of their work.
The curriculum strategy emphasises the opportunity for students to identify, negotiate and undertake their own particular approach to study within the range of activities, practices and associated techniques and processes which define graphic arts and design.
Central to the curriculum strategy is the Learning Agreement. The Learning Agreement provides a mechanism for students to negotiate and implement their own particular approach to study, and enables them to demonstrate the process and outcomes of critical reflection and theoretical contextualisation, as appropriate to their own work.
The overarching course aims are:
• To provide the opportunity for study to students who wish to acquire and develop the necessary technical and practical skills; knowledge and understanding; attributes, attitudes and approaches; and intellectual and creative abilities to perform successfully as creative professionals in the field of graphic arts and design.
• To provide a pertinent and current curriculum that is appropriate and responsive to the needs and aspirations of all students.
• To enable students to work with visual imagery which is integrated with critical theoretical study and to locate their study and practice within the wider social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts of graphic arts and design.
• To encourage and develop a reflective and self-critical approach which enables the student to make and use critical and contextual judgements of their work and that of others.
• To provide a curricular approach and learning strategy which is appropriate and relevant to the needs of a diverse and multidisciplinary constituency.
Learning Outcomes
Learning Outcomes – Level Four
On successful completion of Level Four, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. An initial understanding of the course and its operation.
2. An initial understanding of the technical support facilities and learning technologies available and an initial competence in their use.
3. An understanding of health and safety regulations.
4. An awareness of student support services and how to access them.
5. An initial ability in working to briefs and the meeting of deadlines.
6. An initial capability for personal and collaborative organisation within the studio context.
7. An initial ability in the use of techniques, processes and materials.
8. A developing awareness of the resources available for the research and analysis of other artists and designers, as well as the student’s own work.
9. A developing awareness and understanding of the approaches within the graphic arts and design as they are appropriate to their particular needs and interests.
10. A developing ability for researching and developing solutions.
11. An initial ability to begin to locate aspects of their own work within social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts.
12. An initial ability to initiate, negotiate and develop a body of work according to their particular needs and interests within the field of graphic arts and design
13. An initial capacity for self-critical reflection.
Learning Outcomes – Level Five
On successful completion of Level Five, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. A developing ability to contextualise studio practice through an integration of theoretical and practical study.
2. A developing awareness of the resources available for the research and analysis of theoretical concepts as they are related to studio practice within graphic arts and design.
3. A developed understanding of the range of processes that constitute graphic arts and design.
4. A developed capability in the use of individually appropriate processes, techniques and materials.
5. A developing capacity to embrace ambiguity, uncertainty and unfamiliarity in relation to their individual creative practice.
6. A developed ability to identify, initiate, develop, negotiate and present an individually appropriate body of work.
7. A developed ability to articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes within appropriate academic and professional contexts.
8. A developed ability to locate and situate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts through the Learning Agreement.
9. A developed ability to research, analyse and contextualise their practice through the Learning Agreement.
10. A developed capacity for self-critical reflection.
Learning Outcomes – Level Six
On successful completion of Level Six, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. A comprehensive ability to negotiate, develop, consolidate and present a coherent, individually appropriate and critically informed body of work.
2. A comprehensive ability to articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes within appropriate academic and professional contexts.
3. A comprehensive ability to integrate practical, theoretical and critical skills in the production and presentation of a consolidated body of work, that is representative of an established, sustainable and individually appropriate creative practice.
4. A comprehensive ability to locate and situate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts through the Extended Learning Agreement.
5. A comprehensive ability to research, analyse and contextualise their practice through the Extended Learning Agreement.
6. A comprehensive capacity for self-critical reflection.
_______________________________________
So, the learning outcomes have evolved somewhat from my last post. They are essentially a refined version of the ones we had, with the QAA benchmarks used as a reference point, rather than the obvious basis. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. We have a very successful course, and our new document now reflects what we actually do. Let's hope the reviewers agree on Friday.
Once all of this is sorted, I'm getting back into the techno-experiments.
_______________________________________
Background and philosophy
In accordance with the aims of the course, the curriculum strategy provides, through an integrated approach to theory and practice, opportunities for multidisciplinary and specialist activity. Through the study and practice of graphic arts and design, students develop a comprehensive understanding of the wider social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts of their work.
The curriculum strategy emphasises the opportunity for students to identify, negotiate and undertake their own particular approach to study within the range of activities, practices and associated techniques and processes which define graphic arts and design.
Central to the curriculum strategy is the Learning Agreement. The Learning Agreement provides a mechanism for students to negotiate and implement their own particular approach to study, and enables them to demonstrate the process and outcomes of critical reflection and theoretical contextualisation, as appropriate to their own work.
The overarching course aims are:
• To provide the opportunity for study to students who wish to acquire and develop the necessary technical and practical skills; knowledge and understanding; attributes, attitudes and approaches; and intellectual and creative abilities to perform successfully as creative professionals in the field of graphic arts and design.
• To provide a pertinent and current curriculum that is appropriate and responsive to the needs and aspirations of all students.
• To enable students to work with visual imagery which is integrated with critical theoretical study and to locate their study and practice within the wider social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts of graphic arts and design.
• To encourage and develop a reflective and self-critical approach which enables the student to make and use critical and contextual judgements of their work and that of others.
• To provide a curricular approach and learning strategy which is appropriate and relevant to the needs of a diverse and multidisciplinary constituency.
Learning Outcomes
Learning Outcomes – Level Four
On successful completion of Level Four, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. An initial understanding of the course and its operation.
2. An initial understanding of the technical support facilities and learning technologies available and an initial competence in their use.
3. An understanding of health and safety regulations.
4. An awareness of student support services and how to access them.
5. An initial ability in working to briefs and the meeting of deadlines.
6. An initial capability for personal and collaborative organisation within the studio context.
7. An initial ability in the use of techniques, processes and materials.
8. A developing awareness of the resources available for the research and analysis of other artists and designers, as well as the student’s own work.
9. A developing awareness and understanding of the approaches within the graphic arts and design as they are appropriate to their particular needs and interests.
10. A developing ability for researching and developing solutions.
11. An initial ability to begin to locate aspects of their own work within social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts.
12. An initial ability to initiate, negotiate and develop a body of work according to their particular needs and interests within the field of graphic arts and design
13. An initial capacity for self-critical reflection.
Learning Outcomes – Level Five
On successful completion of Level Five, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. A developing ability to contextualise studio practice through an integration of theoretical and practical study.
2. A developing awareness of the resources available for the research and analysis of theoretical concepts as they are related to studio practice within graphic arts and design.
3. A developed understanding of the range of processes that constitute graphic arts and design.
4. A developed capability in the use of individually appropriate processes, techniques and materials.
5. A developing capacity to embrace ambiguity, uncertainty and unfamiliarity in relation to their individual creative practice.
6. A developed ability to identify, initiate, develop, negotiate and present an individually appropriate body of work.
7. A developed ability to articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes within appropriate academic and professional contexts.
8. A developed ability to locate and situate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts through the Learning Agreement.
9. A developed ability to research, analyse and contextualise their practice through the Learning Agreement.
10. A developed capacity for self-critical reflection.
Learning Outcomes – Level Six
On successful completion of Level Six, the student is able to demonstrate:
1. A comprehensive ability to negotiate, develop, consolidate and present a coherent, individually appropriate and critically informed body of work.
2. A comprehensive ability to articulate their ideas, intentions and outcomes within appropriate academic and professional contexts.
3. A comprehensive ability to integrate practical, theoretical and critical skills in the production and presentation of a consolidated body of work, that is representative of an established, sustainable and individually appropriate creative practice.
4. A comprehensive ability to locate and situate their practice within appropriate social, cultural, historical, professional, critical and technical contexts through the Extended Learning Agreement.
5. A comprehensive ability to research, analyse and contextualise their practice through the Extended Learning Agreement.
6. A comprehensive capacity for self-critical reflection.
_______________________________________
So, the learning outcomes have evolved somewhat from my last post. They are essentially a refined version of the ones we had, with the QAA benchmarks used as a reference point, rather than the obvious basis. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. We have a very successful course, and our new document now reflects what we actually do. Let's hope the reviewers agree on Friday.
Once all of this is sorted, I'm getting back into the techno-experiments.
Saturday 7 November 2009
Learning outcomes v0.1
This is my first stab at imagining some new course learning outcomes. They are currently very similar to the source outcomes I have stolen from the QAA Art & Design subject benchmark statement document that I mentioned in my last post. I hope to simplify them in due course so that they are a bit more student friendly. I also hope to incorporate the views of the course team and students in the development of them, probably by getting everyone to read these blog posts and comment. I've split them into 4 broad categories, Risk, Production, Reflection and Theory, but this is up for debate along with everything else.
BA(Hons) Graphic Arts & Design
Course learning outcomes, Version 0.1
On completion of the course, you will be able to present a body of work which demonstrates your ability to:
[Risk]
employ both convergent and divergent thinking in the processes of observation, investigation, speculative enquiry, visualisation and making
select, test and make appropriate use of materials, processes and environments
[Production]
generate ideas, concepts, proposals, solutions or arguments
develop ideas through to outcomes
work independently and/or collaboratively in response to set briefs and/or as self-initiated activity
[Reflection]
identify personal strengths and needs, and reflect on personal development.
formulate reasoned responses to the critical judgements of others
[Theory]
source and research relevant material, assimilating and articulating relevant findings
locate your practice within the wider social, cultural, professional and ethical contexts both within and beyond the field of graphic arts and design.
analyse information and experiences, formulate independent judgements, and articulate reasoned arguments through reflection, review and evaluation
BA(Hons) Graphic Arts & Design
Course learning outcomes, Version 0.1
On completion of the course, you will be able to present a body of work which demonstrates your ability to:
[Risk]
employ both convergent and divergent thinking in the processes of observation, investigation, speculative enquiry, visualisation and making
select, test and make appropriate use of materials, processes and environments
[Production]
generate ideas, concepts, proposals, solutions or arguments
develop ideas through to outcomes
work independently and/or collaboratively in response to set briefs and/or as self-initiated activity
[Reflection]
identify personal strengths and needs, and reflect on personal development.
formulate reasoned responses to the critical judgements of others
[Theory]
source and research relevant material, assimilating and articulating relevant findings
locate your practice within the wider social, cultural, professional and ethical contexts both within and beyond the field of graphic arts and design.
analyse information and experiences, formulate independent judgements, and articulate reasoned arguments through reflection, review and evaluation
Friday 6 November 2009
Your course is about to expire. Please take action now.
Why have I not blogged recently?
I've been busy busy with the reality of teaching and learning in the 21st century; managing the move into our fantastic new art school building, Broadcasting Place, and dealing with the day-to-day hubbub on a massive undergraduate course. I've had things to say about learning and technology, but I've been too busy doing the business to find the time to write about it all.
Also, I don't write things in this blog for you to read, I write mainly to try and pin the things down that I'm intrigued by, but not totally sure about. Today I opened up a massive can of worms when I decided to start planning for the imminent periodic review of the BA(Hons) Graphic Arts & Design course that I'm currently in charge of at Leeds Met.
If you're not familiar with periodic review, it's basically the process by which a course renews its licence. It happens at least once every five years, and as well as giving the institution the chance to do a proper check on the health of the course, it also opens up the possibility to make major changes. It's a chance to refresh and update everything for the better. I've been a bit-part player in previous reviews, but with the departure of nearly all of my senior colleagues in the School, the task seems to have landed on my lap. That's not a bad thing. I like a challenge.
And a challenge it is. A quick peep at the relevant documentation reveals a mountain of paperwork that will need to be produced for the review, and it's not easy stuff. However, as a trained designer, I have a methodology to tackle this mammoth task.
The first stage is to define the brief, which I have made a start on today. These are the things that Leeds Met says I will need to produce:
• Briefing Statement
• Critical Appraisal
• Course Document
• Programme Specification
• Mapping of Subject benchmark statements
• Module Specifications
• Admissions profile
• Staff CVs
• Statement of Resources
Having half-guessed my way through most of these things, I got stuck on the Mapping of Subject benchmark statements. I had a rough idea of what the benchmarks were from the last review, but sensed that this might be the really important bit. Ultimately, the benchmarks define what degree level means in relation to art & design subjects, so it effectively forms the root of the brief. I quickly found the QAA benchmark statement for Art & Design and, surprisingly, found myself enthralled by what I read. This document was obviously written by people that understand the essence of art and design education, and beautifully articulate all of the things that us purists hold dear. For example:
2.2 Learning in art and design develops:
• the capacity to be creative
• an aesthetic sensibility
• intellectual enquiry
• skills in team working
• an appreciation of diversity
• the ability to conduct research in a variety of modes
• the quality of reflecting on one's own learning and development
• the capacity to work independently, determining one's own future learning needs.
And things like this:
"divergent forms of thinking, which involve generating alternatives, and in which the notion of being 'correct' gives way to broader issues of value, are characteristic of the creative process."
Brilliant. The QAA put 'correct' in quotes. Who are we to doubt the QAA in their questioning of the dogma of the measurable.
This is my favourite: 'Students [in art & design] will have the ability to anticipate and accommodate change, and work within contexts of ambiguity, uncertainty and unfamiliarity.' Call me a saddo, but the celebration of ambiguity and uncertainty in the educational process by the ultimate official authority on the subject in the UK fills me with joy. It also gives me a big, big stick with which to beat off institutional doubters when the reviewers try to pick the thing to pieces.
I've just made a start on adapting some of the learning outcomes from this benchmark statement to use in our new course document, but I'm finding it hard to change it to the point where it's not so obviously stolen from QAA. Much more work will be needed over the next few months, but it feels good to get started. I'll keep you posted.
I've been busy busy with the reality of teaching and learning in the 21st century; managing the move into our fantastic new art school building, Broadcasting Place, and dealing with the day-to-day hubbub on a massive undergraduate course. I've had things to say about learning and technology, but I've been too busy doing the business to find the time to write about it all.
Also, I don't write things in this blog for you to read, I write mainly to try and pin the things down that I'm intrigued by, but not totally sure about. Today I opened up a massive can of worms when I decided to start planning for the imminent periodic review of the BA(Hons) Graphic Arts & Design course that I'm currently in charge of at Leeds Met.
If you're not familiar with periodic review, it's basically the process by which a course renews its licence. It happens at least once every five years, and as well as giving the institution the chance to do a proper check on the health of the course, it also opens up the possibility to make major changes. It's a chance to refresh and update everything for the better. I've been a bit-part player in previous reviews, but with the departure of nearly all of my senior colleagues in the School, the task seems to have landed on my lap. That's not a bad thing. I like a challenge.
And a challenge it is. A quick peep at the relevant documentation reveals a mountain of paperwork that will need to be produced for the review, and it's not easy stuff. However, as a trained designer, I have a methodology to tackle this mammoth task.
The first stage is to define the brief, which I have made a start on today. These are the things that Leeds Met says I will need to produce:
• Briefing Statement
• Critical Appraisal
• Course Document
• Programme Specification
• Mapping of Subject benchmark statements
• Module Specifications
• Admissions profile
• Staff CVs
• Statement of Resources
Having half-guessed my way through most of these things, I got stuck on the Mapping of Subject benchmark statements. I had a rough idea of what the benchmarks were from the last review, but sensed that this might be the really important bit. Ultimately, the benchmarks define what degree level means in relation to art & design subjects, so it effectively forms the root of the brief. I quickly found the QAA benchmark statement for Art & Design and, surprisingly, found myself enthralled by what I read. This document was obviously written by people that understand the essence of art and design education, and beautifully articulate all of the things that us purists hold dear. For example:
2.2 Learning in art and design develops:
• the capacity to be creative
• an aesthetic sensibility
• intellectual enquiry
• skills in team working
• an appreciation of diversity
• the ability to conduct research in a variety of modes
• the quality of reflecting on one's own learning and development
• the capacity to work independently, determining one's own future learning needs.
And things like this:
"divergent forms of thinking, which involve generating alternatives, and in which the notion of being 'correct' gives way to broader issues of value, are characteristic of the creative process."
Brilliant. The QAA put 'correct' in quotes. Who are we to doubt the QAA in their questioning of the dogma of the measurable.
This is my favourite: 'Students [in art & design] will have the ability to anticipate and accommodate change, and work within contexts of ambiguity, uncertainty and unfamiliarity.' Call me a saddo, but the celebration of ambiguity and uncertainty in the educational process by the ultimate official authority on the subject in the UK fills me with joy. It also gives me a big, big stick with which to beat off institutional doubters when the reviewers try to pick the thing to pieces.
I've just made a start on adapting some of the learning outcomes from this benchmark statement to use in our new course document, but I'm finding it hard to change it to the point where it's not so obviously stolen from QAA. Much more work will be needed over the next few months, but it feels good to get started. I'll keep you posted.
Wednesday 9 September 2009
Post-technical drawing
I thought I better do a quick post, seeing as I handed out my blog URL at the EduBloggers F-ALT bash last night, and there is a slim chance that I have new eyeballs to annoy.
Anyhow, back to the old postdigital thing again. I've had a couple of quick chats with Dave-o-White about the slight unease that we both share about the term 'post-digital'. I can't quite put my finger on it (possibly because the concept isn't yet anywhere near fully formed), but postdigital just seems a bit of a distraction, especially when you start discussing it with people for the first time, as Dave and Rich Hall did the other night at an F-ALT debate.
During Dave's excellent presentation at ALT-C this morning about the much more tangible 'Visitors and Residents' concept, he inadvertently tried to explain postdigital by saying "actually, it's more post-technical". This instantly stuck me as a more useful term, as it removes some of the perceived anti-digital vibes. It also draws attention to one of the clearer points in the debate: the desire to focus not on the technical aspect, but on the human aspects. We can reject the technical fetishisation of both the digital and the analogue using the term post-technical, and we use the term to remind us that it is the human triumphs, albeit enabled by technology, that should be promoted.
What do I mean? I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps an example might be useful to tease this out a bit.
'The Manual' that we devised and used in the Open Habitat Second Life pilots is an example of a post-technical approach to learning. 'The Manual' does not attempt to teach any technical skills. Pursuing the tasks in it will inevitably lead to the acquisition of technical skill, but it is the broader and deeper learning that is emphasised, as we think it is more important.
Technical skills are not a bad thing. Technical skills are a very good thing. But over emphasising the technical, especially at the start of a project, sets the wrong tone for learning. By dwelling on the technical, we are saying to the students "You cannot learn the deep stuff, the fun stuff, the creative stuff, the uncertain but important stuff, until you have the technical skills!". Not only does this take all the fun out of learning (well, for me and most of my students anyway), its logic is fundamentally flawed. How much technical stuff is necessary before you can start? Do you need to know, and do you need to have been tested on every feature in Final Cut Pro before you can edit a film? When I used to do software instruction, I used to teach my students one technical skill in FCP - a cut edit - and then I asked them to edit a film for the next hour. And then I didn't do any more FCP classes. Seriously. 99.9 percent of edits in any film are cuts. What is important in editing is timing and sequencing and trial and error. Learning every feature in Final Cut Pro won't help you to become a good editor. As an educator, I shouldn't be promoting the illusion that a comprehensive technical knowledge of software alone will enable them to succeed at HE level. Technical skills are important, but they can be gained as and when needed, at a pace appropriate to the individual learner.
I don't instruct my students in the sharpening of pencils, and I don't prevent them from drawing until they have passed a pencil proficiency test. I ask them to bring me their drawing so that we can talk about their ideas.
Oh, I'm rambling again. If you are new to my blog, I should point out that I use it mainly to tame my badly formed thoughts. Don't take it too seriously. Reading my post back, I think I may have some gaping holes in my arguments. I'll have to plug them later. I'm off the the F-ALT09 party now.
Anyhow, back to the old postdigital thing again. I've had a couple of quick chats with Dave-o-White about the slight unease that we both share about the term 'post-digital'. I can't quite put my finger on it (possibly because the concept isn't yet anywhere near fully formed), but postdigital just seems a bit of a distraction, especially when you start discussing it with people for the first time, as Dave and Rich Hall did the other night at an F-ALT debate.
During Dave's excellent presentation at ALT-C this morning about the much more tangible 'Visitors and Residents' concept, he inadvertently tried to explain postdigital by saying "actually, it's more post-technical". This instantly stuck me as a more useful term, as it removes some of the perceived anti-digital vibes. It also draws attention to one of the clearer points in the debate: the desire to focus not on the technical aspect, but on the human aspects. We can reject the technical fetishisation of both the digital and the analogue using the term post-technical, and we use the term to remind us that it is the human triumphs, albeit enabled by technology, that should be promoted.
What do I mean? I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps an example might be useful to tease this out a bit.
'The Manual' that we devised and used in the Open Habitat Second Life pilots is an example of a post-technical approach to learning. 'The Manual' does not attempt to teach any technical skills. Pursuing the tasks in it will inevitably lead to the acquisition of technical skill, but it is the broader and deeper learning that is emphasised, as we think it is more important.
Technical skills are not a bad thing. Technical skills are a very good thing. But over emphasising the technical, especially at the start of a project, sets the wrong tone for learning. By dwelling on the technical, we are saying to the students "You cannot learn the deep stuff, the fun stuff, the creative stuff, the uncertain but important stuff, until you have the technical skills!". Not only does this take all the fun out of learning (well, for me and most of my students anyway), its logic is fundamentally flawed. How much technical stuff is necessary before you can start? Do you need to know, and do you need to have been tested on every feature in Final Cut Pro before you can edit a film? When I used to do software instruction, I used to teach my students one technical skill in FCP - a cut edit - and then I asked them to edit a film for the next hour. And then I didn't do any more FCP classes. Seriously. 99.9 percent of edits in any film are cuts. What is important in editing is timing and sequencing and trial and error. Learning every feature in Final Cut Pro won't help you to become a good editor. As an educator, I shouldn't be promoting the illusion that a comprehensive technical knowledge of software alone will enable them to succeed at HE level. Technical skills are important, but they can be gained as and when needed, at a pace appropriate to the individual learner.
I don't instruct my students in the sharpening of pencils, and I don't prevent them from drawing until they have passed a pencil proficiency test. I ask them to bring me their drawing so that we can talk about their ideas.
Oh, I'm rambling again. If you are new to my blog, I should point out that I use it mainly to tame my badly formed thoughts. Don't take it too seriously. Reading my post back, I think I may have some gaping holes in my arguments. I'll have to plug them later. I'm off the the F-ALT09 party now.
Wednesday 1 July 2009
Never believe what artists say, only what they do.
It all started for me with David Hockney. I 'got' art because of him. The reason my alter-ego is called Cubist is because of Hockney. Most importantly, he lives in Bridlington, which is just up the road from where I live in Filey.
Last night's Hockney documentary on BBC1 reminded me why I'm in this game. More than anything, it is Hockney's attitude and approach that I aspire to. The ceaseless dedication to exploration. The blunt, non-nonsense Yorkshireness. The love of drawing. The fact that he does not let anyone or anything get in the way, not even his own previous declarations about what is right and wrong.
Enough of the fan-mail. The reason I'm writing this post is because I viewed last night's programme through the lens of postdigitalism. At one point, Hockney said something like, "This is art for the new post-photographic age", which obviously struck a chord with me. In my postdigital musings, I've referred to the predicted death of painting when photography was invented, and the conflict between these two media forms has been the focus of Hockney's most interesting work. The supposed supremacy of photography as the ultimate form of 'realism' is challenged when Hockney points out photography's limitations. Unlike futurism and, Hockney has argued, cubism and traditional painting, photography removes the time from an artwork. The time it takes to craft the work, the period of time the work represents - all but a hundredth of a second are eradicated from the photograph. Space and time are the same dimension, so traditional photography also removes the space, fixing the viewer to the spot. In real life, we never stop moving - "If your eyes stop moving, you're dead" as Hockney stated in the documentary - but the photograph freezes the world, whereas painting is about the continuum of space-time, with a living human being at its centre.
This recognition of the limitations of photography sometimes sees Hockney reject the photographic process altogether, but at other times it liberates him to use the camera more like a paint brush. The most obvious example of this is a Hockney's photo-collage 'joiner', with multiple perspectives via multiple photographs all collaged into one composition. Time and space return to the artwork, and the photographic medium is commandeered to serve the eye, heart and hand once more.
Might this tension between photography and painting in Hockney's work inform for the postdigital debate? The photograph and the digital have a lot in common. I'm not referring directly to digital photography here, but rather to the way that a snapshot captures and reduces the world to a small abstracted piece. It denies the continuum of life. It is one tiny part of the whole. Similarly, the digital captures and reduces the world into lots of tiny pieces. What is gained from this process of digitisation - the ability to make accurate copies, for example - drowns out the fundamental things that are lost. Identifying something fundamental that education loses in the digital, as Hockney identifies something fundamental that art loses in the photographic, may help us to form a coherent postdigital view. Just as the camera is liberated from the dogma of photography to serve art, so the computer may be liberated from the dogma of the digital to serve education.
Enough of this aspirational theorising. I have a degree course to re-write this year. How exactly will all of this postdigital stuff help me to write a better course? This will be real test. It's time for some convergent thinking.
Imagine (2009) David Hockney - A Bigger Picture. London, BBC1, 30 June.
Last night's Hockney documentary on BBC1 reminded me why I'm in this game. More than anything, it is Hockney's attitude and approach that I aspire to. The ceaseless dedication to exploration. The blunt, non-nonsense Yorkshireness. The love of drawing. The fact that he does not let anyone or anything get in the way, not even his own previous declarations about what is right and wrong.
Enough of the fan-mail. The reason I'm writing this post is because I viewed last night's programme through the lens of postdigitalism. At one point, Hockney said something like, "This is art for the new post-photographic age", which obviously struck a chord with me. In my postdigital musings, I've referred to the predicted death of painting when photography was invented, and the conflict between these two media forms has been the focus of Hockney's most interesting work. The supposed supremacy of photography as the ultimate form of 'realism' is challenged when Hockney points out photography's limitations. Unlike futurism and, Hockney has argued, cubism and traditional painting, photography removes the time from an artwork. The time it takes to craft the work, the period of time the work represents - all but a hundredth of a second are eradicated from the photograph. Space and time are the same dimension, so traditional photography also removes the space, fixing the viewer to the spot. In real life, we never stop moving - "If your eyes stop moving, you're dead" as Hockney stated in the documentary - but the photograph freezes the world, whereas painting is about the continuum of space-time, with a living human being at its centre.
This recognition of the limitations of photography sometimes sees Hockney reject the photographic process altogether, but at other times it liberates him to use the camera more like a paint brush. The most obvious example of this is a Hockney's photo-collage 'joiner', with multiple perspectives via multiple photographs all collaged into one composition. Time and space return to the artwork, and the photographic medium is commandeered to serve the eye, heart and hand once more.
Might this tension between photography and painting in Hockney's work inform for the postdigital debate? The photograph and the digital have a lot in common. I'm not referring directly to digital photography here, but rather to the way that a snapshot captures and reduces the world to a small abstracted piece. It denies the continuum of life. It is one tiny part of the whole. Similarly, the digital captures and reduces the world into lots of tiny pieces. What is gained from this process of digitisation - the ability to make accurate copies, for example - drowns out the fundamental things that are lost. Identifying something fundamental that education loses in the digital, as Hockney identifies something fundamental that art loses in the photographic, may help us to form a coherent postdigital view. Just as the camera is liberated from the dogma of photography to serve art, so the computer may be liberated from the dogma of the digital to serve education.
Enough of this aspirational theorising. I have a degree course to re-write this year. How exactly will all of this postdigital stuff help me to write a better course? This will be real test. It's time for some convergent thinking.
Imagine (2009) David Hockney - A Bigger Picture. London, BBC1, 30 June.
Sunday 28 June 2009
Google Waves 'hello!' to the postdigital learner
"Where the digital proposes the perfect finite conditions for a perfect existence regardless of matter, (as for example in the human genome project), in the postdigital analogue (as for example in the ironies of genetic and wet biological art) human consciousness is regarded as almost infinitely malleable, able to shape its identity in response to local (and technological) conditions aware all the time of the range of possibilities (digital and analogue) that are not developed." (Punt, 2001)
Excuse me whilst I go off on some uncertain tangents. There is a high probability that I am about to talk poppycock, but as Theodore Roosevelt said, “The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything.”
A few years ago, I spent a lot of time downloading chunks of DNA from the National Center for Biotechnology Information's Genebank, and wrote some code to visualise them. My basic idea was to read the As, Gs, Ts and Cs, and move a pixel either up, down, left or right, tracing a line. Different DNA chunks drew different squiggles. They looked like they made some sort of sense, which of course they did, and I got particularly obsessed with comparing mitochondria sequences from different organisms. You can see some of this stuff on my old site:
cubistscarborough.com/iantruelove
Along with every other living organism that has ever existed, we are digital to our very core. We are code. Our existence is encoded in a very long sequence of As, Ts, Cs and Gs. We are Data, Not Animals. But, of course, we are animals, not data. We are fuzzy and vague and interesting. We are wet and unimaginably complex. We are a whole, conscious being that exists over time. We are not digital. We are postdigital.
Not really sure where that one is going, but it might give me an excuse to do some more DNA art. Lets move onto some different poppycock.
The original article that the opening quote is taken from also mentions Gene Youngblood, who reminded us 25 years ago that, "the computer translates the continuous phenomena of the world into discrete units." The inescapable reduction of the homogenous whole into separate pieces, through the process of digitisation, might provide a useful metaphor for education. One of the things that struck a chord with me when I watched Liz Coleman's talk last week was her criticism of the fragmentation of education. I have rallied against the tyranny of the module as the dominant unit of learning ever since it was imposed on us. This quantising of education, splitting learning into smaller and smaller units, serves the inspectors, the financiers and the timetable police very well. It does not serve the whole learner – a complex human being – very well at all. The reason I dislike (and refuse to use) VLEs is primarily because they reinforce and often impose this modular approach. Perhaps it is this sort of 'digitisation' of education that postdigitalism might react against. To re-appropriate the words of Peter Weibel as detailed in Punt's article, education should follow the analogical principles of 'similarity, congruency and continuity', and reject the 'discontinuous, non homogenous elements' as characterised by the digital, and played out in the modular system. The 3 year long, holistic view of learning as promoted by Professor Graham Gibbs and others aligns with this newly invented version of postdigitalism. Taking this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, the postdigital learner is the lifelong learner, the informal and formal learner, the whole human learner. Not a learner who has been captured, cut, and pasted into easily measurable and inspectable chunks, but an integrated learner, inseparable from the world that they are connected to. In this parallel postdigital universe, I'm allowed to get excited about Google Wave, as it may potentially provide an excellent way to support the postdigital learner.
I think I'm rambling a bit now. I'll stop.
Punt, M. (2001) Human Consciousness and the Postdigital Analogue. Leonardo 35 (2), 2002. pp119-120
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
