Prof. Robin Nelson,
University of London (CSSD)
Practice as Research
Interlocking Spheres
Artsworld
PaR
Media sphere
Academic sphere
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 selfevident 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"
Know-how
Performer knowledge
Tacit knowledge
Embodied knowledge
(Phenomenological)
experience
PRAXIS
theory imbricated
within practice
Know what
Know that
Critical reflection
Explicit knowledge
Practitioner ‘action research’
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 subpanel 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