Simon
Persighetti
Dartington
Dartington
c.scott@dartington.ac.uk
Exercise 8: Merging Maps of Interdisciplinary Practice
|
Simon
Persighetti |
Catriona
Scott Dartington c.scott@dartington.ac.uk |
|
|
Rationale: |
| Suitable
for: Academic staff, students and administrators involved with assessment. Minimum 6 and maximum 20. |
| Timings
90 minutes total. |
| Facilitators: The workshop should be led by a supervisor to: - lead the exercises - chair discussions - manage the time - nominate observer/reporters The role of observers/reporters would be to monitor: - Verbal and non-verbal interactions - The management of conflicting or differing views - Make note of connections between fields, concepts, ideas - identify implications for the assessment of interdisciplinary practice |
| Resources
needed: Chairs Flip Charts Marker pens |
| Running
the Workshop: Stage 1: Group discussion while showing/sharing the maps (30 minutes) • What methods do you use to explore or expand your experience of your particular discipline? • Is there a relationship between such skills and experiments and the skills of other disciplines? Stage 2: Practical exercise B (pairs). MERGING MAPS (30 minutes) Individual participants are asked to choose a map made by another that interests them, OR via negotiation OR random pairing. The participants are asked to compare maps identifying: - common or eliding interests - conflicting or colliding interests Each pair is asked to consider the kind of project that might be developed if both maps were to be merged. In other words, what kinds of projects or outcomes might arise out of collaboration between the two fields? Pairs are asked to prepare an active presentation of the proposed interdisciplinary project. Participants should be encouraged to provide outlines of their proposed project that includes further illustrations or mappings of the collaboration. Stage 3. Proposal presentations and group discussion (30 minutes) The group reconvenes for presentations. Through discussion, the potential modes of Interdisciplinary Practice indicated should be identified, examined and interrogated. - Identify the range of disciplines/fields represented within the group. Note whether or not the terms used to describe these fields adequately represent the variety of practices represented. - Identify a range of processes, common across the range of disciplines represented in the group. |
| Guidance
notes and recommendations: The final discussion should be structured to lead towards the following session Negotiating Criteria for Assessment. In this next session the proposals will be used as models for investigating and identifying relevant criteria for assessing such work and potential outcomes. |
| Bibliography: Barthes, R. (1977) Image Music Text, London: Harper Collins Barthes, R., Havas, R. (1976) ‘Listening’ Other Rooms Other Voices: Audio Works by Artists, ed. Kurjakovic, D., Lohse, S. (1999), Zurich: Memory/Cage Broadhurst, S. (1999) Liminal Acts, London: Cassell Burroughs, W. (1985) The Adding Machine: Collected Essays, London: John Calder Goulish, M. (2000) Thirty-nine Microlectures, London: Routledge Hughes, D. (1996) Collaboration: Process or Product, Means or End, Democracy or Demagogy? Performing Arts International, Vol. 1, part 1, Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers Kurjakovic, D. ‘Theoretical Note’, Other Rooms Other Voices: Audio Works by Artists, ed. Kurjakovic, D., Lohse, S. (1999), Zurich: Memory/Cage Lepecki, A.(1996) As If Dance Was Visible, Performance Research Volume 1, No.3 1996 – On Illusion – London: Routledge |
Simon
Persighetti
Catriona
Scott
FDTL
- Assessing
Group Practice