Sara Byers – PGCERT 2021

Having checked the difference between quantitative and qualitative research, I looked at this website to gain an understanding of thematic analysis and how I might utilise it:

https://delvetool.com/blog/thematicanalysis

In response to the ideas in this link:

I’m asking questions of my focus group both as a questionnaire and as written transcript of conversations during interview so I want to be able to analyse this effectively and any guidance I can get at this stage will help to shape my approach for the best possible outcome.

I am hoping to be able to identify key recurring points in the feedback that I get from the study and get an insight into how people use their awareness of challenge when they are exploring their subject matter or learning a new skill or technique. This article suggests that thematic analysis will help to identify patterns in my data. I’m concerned in case this would rely on a larger data-set than I will achieve with the 8 participants I am planning to interview.

I like the idea of the analysis being flexible – I do wonder what the alternative to that would be and whether it’s something that I should consider in order to make the most of my results.

I found this link:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nick-Fox/post/What_is_the_difference_between_content_analysis_and_thematic_analysis_as_methods_used_in_qualitative_data_analysis/attachment/59d61f1279197b807797d7ba/AS%3A273622457880604%401442248085721/download/Qual+Analysis+ch+2.pdf

This article discusses three main types of analysis, suggesting that thematic is the principal technique widely used, allowing the data to be analysed in terms of ‘principal concepts or themes’. The other two approaches discussed in the article are, firstly: ‘grounded theory’ which appears to be involve more interaction with the ideas of the participants and finally; ‘Conversational analysis’ which is most effective when how something is said is as important as what is said. I can imagine that all of these techniques would feature in my data gathering, not having carried out any kind of research before, I want to be able to apply the technique that will help me obtain the most information that I can use from the study. I wonder how I can quantify how someone replies to a question. If I’m asking them to talk about having gone outside of their comfort zone, how do I analyse or quantify their response?

There’s a description in this article of a study  where emergent themes which were unexpected but common to the interviewees, relied on the intuition of the researcher to analyse them.  This suggests to me that there is no clear pathway with qualiative research but that keeping the questions as succinct as possible and being thorough will be important. This is reinforced by this quote:

In their introduction to thematic analysis of qualitative data,
Marshall and Rossman (1999: 150) suggest that data analysis is
the process of
‘…bringing order, structure and interpretation to the mass of
collected data. … It is the search for general statements about
relationships among categories of data … it is the search among
data to identify content.

The article also has these areas of focus which I think could be helpful :

• organise the data
• generate categories or themes
• code the data
• test emergent understandings of the data
• search for alternative explanations of the data
• write-up the data analysis

Investigating the methods: Using Diagrams

As a practitioner and researcher in this process, I plan to investigate the best methods to use. I’m trying to think about how I can construct a research project creatively and for it to be more participatory, for example when I’m framing my question, and how to structure that process. By looking at a range of approaches and choosing the most efficient technique, this should enable me to delve as deeply as I can into my question within the time-constraints and on a small scale – although it feels fairly large-scale at the moment!

I intend to improve my offer as teacher/educator and to better understand how my students apply the concept of having a comfort zone to their making process. I’m hoping to be able to see this process holistically (a quote from Jo Howcroft, a PGCert Peer) and to be aware of how my practice informs my research. I aim for this process to go both ways so that my findings and the research-process then inform my practice as suggested by Jean McNiff (McNiff, J. 2015) who also states that: ‘The ‘meaning’ (your research question) has for you emerges as you do the research and explain what you are doing and why you are doing it’.

I found many images of comfort zones on the web and then thought to ask participants to draw a view of theirs as a way of initiating conversation about how a comfort zone feels.

Encouraged by my tutor’s positive response to this idea and her book suggestion: ‘Making sense of place: exploring creative and (inter)active research methods with young people’ (Trell, E. & Van Hoven, B. 2010), I asked participants to draw their impression of their comfort zone.

According to Trell & Van Hoven, a conventional interview technique may not sufficiently reveal the ‘layers of place’ associated with an imagined concept. Making the imaginary accessible for others through attempting to describe it with words, might not be as effective. Trell & Van Hoven cite research by Cele (Cele, S. 2006) who used walks, drawing and photography (in addition to interviewing) for exploring the daily (real) places of children.

Enabling children to create drawings and to interact with each other, the researcher, and place itself, provided possibilities for communicating a range of aspects of ‘place’.  This helps the researcher to read the imagery and get a more tangible sense of what it signifies to participants.

Although the Tell & Van Hoven material relates to ‘geographical research’ described as  ‘Making sense of place’ I feel that it resonates with asking the participants of my study to describe and then draw their comfort zones.

According to Trell and Van Hoven’s research: ‘mental maps provide an overview of places, objects or activities relative to each other. They can also be used to make an assessment about the relative importance of places for an individual. Whereas mental maps as such may provide enough information for a psychologist to analyse additional meanings conveyed by the use of shape and colour included in each map, for geographers interested in the meanings of places, additional information is necessary. Hence, explanations by the ‘author’ of the map are essential.

To quote LA Paul: ‘This brings out another, somewhat less familiar fact about the relationship between knowledge and experience: just as knowledge about the experience of one individual can be inaccessible to another individual, what you can know about yourself at one time can be inaccessible to you at another time.‘(Paul, L.A. 2004) I’ve chosen this quote to illustrate that it’s impossible to know another person’s experience, which is what research attempts to do! This perception might change..

I want to ask people to draw their comfort zones and interpret them so that these can be a key to explaining how it features in their creative practice, or what it might look like to be learning a new skill. This could result in abstract images, or figurative ones and I’ve emphasised that this is completely up to them. I’m not asking them to do this in my interview and visualise their comfort zone on the spot rather than have time to prepare or look on the web for inspiration where there are many examples.

According to Tina Cook, in her article ‘The Purpose of Mess in Action Research’: David Hockney (artist), when addressing the problem of depicting both what he could see and what the viewer could see, employed the use of a collage of multiple view points to ‘break down the wall between the viewer and the view’ (Hockney, 1998:60). This way of presenting visual information allowed more to be seen, from a number of perspectives, and enabled viewers to engage with the sweep of the artists gaze (Hockney, 1982). When multi-faceted reflections on practice are brought together in one space, this too can provide opportunities for new ways of seeing, thinking, and theorising.

I would value being able to see the participants reflections from a number of perspectives as Hockney describes. I hope that visualising their comfort zones will add a different angle to my research.

Early findings from my research using participants’ drawings of their comfort zone as a prompt was really successful and helped to unpack their interpretations of what could be seen as an abstract idea. They could verbalise something strongly held in their imaginations, but obviously not visible to me. I could get a better sense of how this manifested for them.

Whilst talking about what made them feel the most comfortable and stable, several participants described ‘place’ as being important to them, to feel comfortable enough to begin to work on their art practice. Six of the of the thirteen participants talked of having a strong visual image of what they wanted to make. There was also much discussion of geographical metaphors such as ‘diving off a mountain’ when leaving the comfort zone, or ‘being in a valley of indecision’ or ‘having a path to follow’.

To my mind, trying to make sense of someone else’s imagery is echoed in this text ‘Embodiment in Metaphorical Imagination’ (Gibbs Jr, W. 2005) ‘We may refer to the scenes we construct as we read a novel, recall images or past life experiences, or experience strong emotions rising into consciousness. But human imagination is also an unconscious process that uses metaphor to map aspects of long-term memory onto immediate experience.

I like the idea here of using metaphors to map the intangible, to manifest what is hidden and gain a new understanding of it, in the telling/describing of it. This is an amazing book (Gibbs Jr,W. 20005) which explores the use of metaphorical language and I love how that ties in with human experience of natural markers in the real world.

I now present detailed examples of how image schemas, and the conceptual metaphors they give rise to, underline several kinds of abstract ideas and concepts. This work is based on systematic analyses of linguistic expressions referring to different conceptual domains. Most generally, the evidence discussed here supports the idea that people use their understanding of different embodied activities to imaginatively structure more abstract ideas and events.

Embodiment in Metaphorical Imagination, Gibbs Jr, W. Grounding Cognition, the role of perception and action in Memory, Language and Thinking, Cambridge University Press. 2005 Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R.A.

For the 22^nd November SIP Session

Brief:

For the session, please think of 5 sentences that describe your research project to present in the class. These could be framed considering aspects that your SiP project needs to cover, namely original context/background; rationale for selecting the topic; reflection on research method/s used; summary of project findings (or a reflection on the data you will be collecting). You should have in mind the assessment criteria for the unit: 1) Identify a topic for enquiry, justifying its professional significance; 2) Investigate methods of enquiry appropriate to the specific contexts of the topic; 3) Conduct a scholarly enquiry; and 4) Present project findings in a coherent, context-sensitive manner.

Research question: An exploratory study of an artist’s relationship with their comfort zone during their making process and when learning a new skill. What is helpful and not helpful in a learning context in order to support participant’s exploration of this relationship?

Original context: I have been a studio-based art technician for a year, before that I was workshop based teaching practical metal-work skills. I am now required to support the learning of emerging technologies which as a digital visitor, is a new and potentially challenging area for me.

Rationale: – Whilst learning these skills and also during teaching practical techniques, some of these demonstrating hazardous equipment, the notion of the comfort zone has become something I want to explore further. I recognise that I learn by challenging myself and want to find out if students have awareness about how this mechanism works for them when learning a skill or when growing their art-practice. I also want to know what is helpful and not helpful during the development of this awareness for them.

Intervention: I feel that this concept also applies to developing subject matter and a making practice and choosing whether to travel into unknown areas. I want to explore whether the concept of challenging oneself can be a learned strategy, a tool to enable growth in order to progress an idea or learn a skill.

I found scientific research demonstrating that the brain changes and grows when an outcome is not certain.

Methods I will aim to be reflexive so that my position and the context of the research has clarity when I’m compiling data. I will be interviewing students who may feel that this is some kind of test with a value-judgment attached. I will endeavour to make sure that it’s clear that the study is for personal research. As a technician I have no input on academic assessments for students and I will emphasise this from the outset.

I intend to investigate through qualitative research using a questionnaire and in-depth interviews. I have read that methods require theoretical underpinning and are never neutral even with the best intentions (Dr Glynis Cousin) So I am working on my questions and I am also considering introducing a diagram exercise, asking participants to draw their journey across the various comfort, learning, growth and panic zones. I want to be intuitive about this to allow themes to emerge that I might not be expecting and I am researching how I could present my findings

I am trying to work out how many people to interview and how to frame the questions to avoid any bias on my part. I aim to improve my teaching practice through reflecting as effectively as I can on the outcome of my survey. I think that I will use a questionnaire and interview process, asking students from across BA and MA sculpture pathways to participate. I want to learn what is useful to them and what is not

I will need to be careful to be reflexive so that my position and the context of the research has clarity when I’m compiling data.

Could I make the questionnaire anonymous? Is there a value-judgement being made about students who choose to stay within their comfort zone?

The journey from the known to the unknown becomes a tool – do students use their comfort zone as a catalyst to learning, can they and do they also apply this principle to developing their subject matter and working process.

that Through honing my research question and trying to work out exactly what I would like to learn from the process.

Any data I collect will enable me to support students to

I me to make that transition from comfort zone to a place where I learn.

1)Identify a topic for enquiry – Justifying its professional significance.

I became interested in the idea of being outside the comfort zone so my research question became an exploratory study of an artist’s relationship with their comfort zone when learning a new skill but then I also began to apply this to how to develop the making process.

My intention is apply this knowledge to my instructive technical sessions and also tutorials when the discussion is more process-led.

As a technician and teacher, I want to enable students to know their learning and to ascertain what is helpful and not helpful in a learning/teaching context in order to support exploration of this relationship.

I’m interested in people’s understanding of how they develop their work and whether they have identified or can identify how they deal with challenges when making and learning new skills. One’s relationship with the making process can be fraught with uncertainty and indecision, how do you navigate this in order to move forward and grow. By finding out more specifically about how people learn to manage this, I intend to learn how better to facilitate people’s learning in tutorial and workshop situations. I am interested in how to enable students to know their learning process and develop it. and use this to inform the way that I teach and hold the space for them. How can I facilitate their explorations and support their learning and growth

2) Investigate methods of enquiry appropriate to the specific contexts of the topic;

To understand the concepts, opinions or experiences centered around my research question, I intend to investigate through qualitative research. Through honing my research question and trying to work out exactly what I would like to learn from the process, I am trying to work out how many people to interview and how to frame the questions to avoid any bias on my part. I aim to improve my teaching practice through reflecting as effectively as I can on the outcome of my survey. I think that I will use a questionnaire and interview process, asking students from across BA and MA sculpture pathways to participate. I want to learn what is useful to them and what is not.

I aim to make a questionnaire for students and teachers asking them if they are aware of the notion of ‘comfort zone’ or level of challenge, and how they feel these terms relate to their working and learning process. I plan to interview two staff and two students so that I can go into more depth about their experiences and find out from them what would help them in an education setting. I would like to learn how people feel that they learn and also to find out from other teachers if they are aware of this when structuring their teaching.

I want to look at how teachers/techs use their awareness of the notion of comfort zone/challenge when teaching and I also want to ask students if they are aware of their relationship with their comfort zone when learning.

Present project findings in a coherent, context-sensitive manner. 

I currently don’t have findings so I’m not sure how I will present these. The next stage for me is to gather data to analyse.

I have these questions for students:

1)   What does the term ‘comfort zone’ mean to you in relation to your practice or when learning a new skill?

I’m beginning to think of ‘challenging yourself’ as a partner-term for comfort zone. I’d like to find out how people relate to either term. I want to keep focussed but I’m also recognising that learning a new skill could mean learning how to trust your own instincts whilst making. First steps as an artist require trusting your own ability and potentially taking what can feel like epic risks in order to do grapple with your idea ‘in the real world’.  Manifesting an idea as an object/performance/installation has huge challenges attached to it because what you make is so visible.   

A sculpture/installation/performance exists in real space, the process of getting something 3D off the page, from 2 to 3D is challenging. Students can find that step daunting.  

2) Can you give an example of a time when you were outside of your comfort zone and how this affected your development? Looking back and plotting your journey as an artist, what is your perception of being inside or outside of it (or challenging yourself) when you are making (important to keep bringing it back to making/process?)  

3)    What did you learn from that process? 

4)    Are you able to navigate your learning – are you aware of how you learn best? 

What measures do you take to help yourself to learn, can you be specific? For example, do you know that you function best when there’s a deadline, so have learned to generate these for yourself?

5)    What is your perception of the challenges you face when making work or learning a new skill.

6) Looking at this diagram (comfort zone diagram from the web), where do you think you need to be in order to develop your skill-set and art-practice the most effectively. Can you explain – Can you give specific examples?

7)    What can someone like me do to facilitate your journey – what’s helpful/not helpful ?

At this point, I am thinking about the themes that I am trying to uncover, and to finalise specific questions. I am still trying to frame the research question and have gone from focussing on learning styles to really grappling with what it means to be in your comfort zone or to challenge yourself when you are learning a new skill or a new potential path with your subject matter/art-practice.

I’ve been talking to colleagues, peers at work and friends to find out how they see their practice and learn new skills in relation to working outside of what they know.

My original idea was to learn how to operate at 3D printer and explore this from the perspective of a digital immigrant. To possibly make a filmed element around learning how to use the printer and filming how it works. I made a film in lockdown about using blutak as a very simple technique to kick-start explorations. The theme of this was that you can begin a potential artwork by being playful and small-scale, which may feel completely in your comfort zone, but then the sky can be the limit and you can be hugely ambitious – for example by making a large installation from a million small-scale units.

The theme of the question then became how a digital immigrant can learn something well enough to enhance the learning of digital natives and to look at what resources are available to enable one to make this transition. Investigating these resources and gauging their effectiveness and offering views on these. This is important for others in a similar situation including students from digitally-poor backgrounds who may struggle. I planned to ask colleagues who currently teach digital skills and ask them if they consider themselves to be digital immigrants/visitors or digital natives/residents. These terms are open to criticism as are the learning styles and I did consider writing about the latter.

I changed to focussing on the comfort zone/challenge of the making process through getting feedback in group discussions in response to my talking about the question and realising that I have a strong concept of the comfort zone in my own art practice. Most of this year has been spent outside of it with the extreme challenges of the PGCert but I have learned so much!

I am reading: ‘Interviews: A Skeptical Review in Interpreting Interviews’. (Alvesson, M. 2021) in order to understand more about the process of thematic analysis and how to apply it to my research.

The acknowledgment in this document of how difficult it is to provide an ‘overview of a research field’ and that ‘all distinctions mean the arbitrary creation of order and patterns’ is daunting but at the same time comforting. This goes some way towards confirming my understanding of action research as being about rigour through a messy sea of information/process and the sifting of data as described in Tina Cook’s: ‘The purpose of mess in Action Research.’ In this paragraph Cook describes how a path of enquiry might branch off into other areas of discovery and this has been my experience completely:

‘We felt we were using an action research process to address issues, to learn and to develop knowledge in a manner that was appropriate to the task, but we did not see ourselves as following any given model of research processes found in the literature. We could not say we were following a particular path of enquiry or a spiral of action research as we kept branching off into other areas of discourse and discovery. We kept adapting our research, either by shifting our spiral to another plane, or by adding new loops and pathways. We felt, however, that this process of adding to, shifting and branching off, thinking and sifting, was important to our research. It helped us recognise inter-connectedness and complexities involved in our enquiries although it left us unable to isolate clear lines of progression. We then felt unsure where to go next in our enquiry and often described ourselves as ‘being in a mess’. Comfort was not found through consulting accounts of other action research projects.’

Interesting that the word comfort features here, which suggest comfort zone.

I have really grappled with several different directions in my research and have gone down countless rabbit holes and had countless tabs open for days. I also recognise the ‘rigour required to bring together a messy turn’(Cooke, T). Which has taken me way out of my own comfort zone. Applying ‘rigour’ has meant that I’ve probably written and re-written much more than I needed to but this is my method of interpreting and absorbing information.

When interviewing participants, I recognise that I am drawn to the kind of research described as ‘Romanticism’ (Dingwall 1997). This is a term new to me, as is what Alvesson describes as Neo-Positivism which he states has a dominating position (in research), although this text was written in 2011. He says that: ‘The problem with this, (Neo-Positivism) as is being increasingly recognized, is that respondents may produce only superficial and cautious responses. In addition, the meaning of words used is often unclear–trying to understand meaning often calls for follow-up questions’. Neo-Positivism seems to be centred on quantitative principles, and I found this definition of it:

‘Neopositivists consider sound scientific methodology to be the first principle of sociological analysis. For them sound scientific methodology involves mathematical and other formal models that incorporate formalization of variables’. Sociology Guide.Com 2021

I am more interested in Romanticism, as described here, as it feels like the most effective way of getting the most from the interviews and I will try to have open questions so that they are doorways rather than dead-ends.

As noted by Dingwall
(1997: 52), the ‘dominant kind of qualitative study appears to be one in which the investigator carries out a bunch of semi-structured interviews which are then taped and transcribed’. Through such interviews, the researcher often gains a first insight into the constructed realities that are wrapped up in the jargon of the respondent. Through observations, however, the researcher gains a partially independent view of the experience on which the respondent’s language has constructed those realities (Erlandson et al., 1993: 99).
Hence, interviews and observation are interactive.

I want participants to feel that they are in a ‘warm situation’ and hope that this will result in them feeling that they can genuinely share their views and be open about their artistic journeys and experiences. I have one-to-one tutorials with the students I’ve invited to participate on a regular basis and already have a rapport with them. I can see that; ‘Turning up the room temperature from cold or lukewarm (neutral) to warm or even hot (very friendly) in an interview setting is not a straightforward way of accomplishing better interviews or producing more interesting and rich accounts’.(Alvesson) so I will be mindful of sticking to the structure of the questions and of trying not to lead the interview – as much as I can stay neutral I will endeavour to do so. Especially in light of this paragraph:

‘The interview subject has potentially much of value to say, but this calls for the researcher to actively lead or support that subject into intelligent talk. Interviewer and interviewee thus collaborate in the ‘co-construction of knowledge’. The positions of the two then become less distinct and the value of the terms may in some cases be questionable’(Alvesson)

I also recognise that a ‘co-construction of knowledge’ might be inevitable as described here. But then this seems to be contradicted later in the text by describing Romanticism as ‘An active approach which may produce more varied and, therefore, more possible idea-stimulating talk’.

Also Alvesson says: ‘interviews can only be managed to a certain extent and that this leads to much complication’. So there’s contradiction here and as this is my first ever research, I am aware that I will have to just choose a method and hope that it’s the best choice. How do I get participants to feedback experience without biasing it with my own agenda, subconscious or otherwise? How do I encourage a dialogue, as I do with tutorials, and allow the flow to happen without worrying that: ‘interviewees are guided by expectations of what the researcher wants to hear and social norms for how a person should express themself’.(Alvesson)

Alvesson here quotes Fontana and Frey(1994: 371)

‘This makes the interview more honest, morally sound, and reliable, because it treats the respondent as an equal, allows him or her to express personal feelings, and therefore presents a more ‘realistic’ picture that can be uncovered using traditional interview methods’.

Alvesson further says: ‘An example here is Scheurich (1997: 67) who has argued against conventional views on interviews, emphasizing that the ‘reality’ of these is ‘ambiguous, relative, and unknowable’. This has not prevented him from claiming that interviewees are active resistors of dominance by the interviewer and from stating that ‘I have found this to be true in my own interviewing as a researcher’. He has also claimed that:

I find that interviewees carve out space of their own, that they can often control some or part of the interview, that they may push against or resist my goals, my intentions, my questions, my meanings.(Alvesson)

McNiff also states that: ‘Your increased awareness and your readiness to be self-critical will probably have an influence on the people you are working with. You are aiming to influence them for the better. There is nothing sinister in the idea of influence, and everything to celebrate; most ideas that people have were influenced by someone else, somewhere else in time and space. This is the way that knowledge evolves, a process of learning from others and reworking existing knowledge in new ways.’

The above quote makes me think of Picasso saying: “Good artists copy; great artist’s steal” He also said: ‘it takes a long time to be become young’. I think the latter of these Picasso quotes could be drawing a parallel between being young and willing to take risks (go outside of your comfort zone) compared to the self-consciousness of adulthood.

I am really interested to try out the Romanticist approach and then revisit points raised in these referenced texts.

I’m beginning to really try and shape my research question and finding it incredibly hard to be specific and not make it too broad. I recognise that in order to get value from this cycle I need to focus and not try and do too much. I’ve just made tried to make a version of a research cycle using a diagram that we’ve looked at and this was useful. I have real issues with structure and missed the opportunity of making a power-point for recent tutorials, so that I could really log my research activities thus far.

I have made several PP’s for students but these have been largely image-based to show examples of artists for example, so I’ve not registered a PP as being an effective way of demonstrating my thought process using bullet-pointing and compartmentalising the sea of information. I do feel swamped and daunted by how much I’ve read and then not actually summarised, or made notes from. I aim to get better at organising that. I’m going to look at making a MIRO so that I can have a more visual record of my sources and research explorations.

On Monday, my tutorial group was so inspiring. I saw several PP’s of my peer’s investigations. Also Petra had a really great system of mapping out her research. I was really impressed with how people, through their research questions, are grappling with the core issues of their teaching practice. This feels like big stuff, the stuff of experience and hard-won perspectives on personal concerns. I really got a sense of this through the presentation of the info using the PP’s and I kicked myself for not recognising how useful an organisational tool this would be. A good lesson to learn.

Proposed Questionnaire for SIP on original research question

I’m working on questions for the focus group. I’m hoping to organise a Teams session where I brief the invited participants, then leave them to discuss it, recording it so that I can transcribe. A peer on the course, or possibly my tutor suggests this approach and I think it would be tantalising to not be there to hear or to guide the conversation but that is the whole point – this would lead to a more un-biased discussion. So the questions are important then, to get the ball rolling without biasing the outcome, or as much as that is possible. I’m realising that it is impossible to be compeletely neutral around this.

This is my current questionnaire for teaching staff/technicians/students. I will interview my peers to gain insight into their awareness of learning styles and to what extent this influences their teaching.

The questions will consist of:

1) Are you aware of your own learning style, how and when did you learn about it?

2) How does this influence/shape your teaching – how do you integrate this awareness into your daily practice? (please give 3 examples)

3) Do you encourage students to know their own learning style, how would you encourage them to find out – what resources would you direct them to? (please give 3 examples)

I would ask students these questions:

1) Are you aware of your own learning style, how and when did you learn about it?

2) Does knowing how you learn the most effectively, empower you to make the most of your learning opportunities? (please give 3 examples)

3) How do you adapt the resources available on your course? (please give 3 examples)

My focus-group will be BA Sculpture students and technical staff from UAL Camberwell. I will also have a focus-group discussion with academics and technicians on teaching technology and how this can be shaped by a knowledge of learning styles.

18^th October 2021

Starting to use the Prussa!

Here I go, learning how to use this thing that took 6months to arrive during lockdown and then sat under my desk for 6months as I grappled to teach students technical skills online.

My aim is to learn how to use it and analyse this process as a digital visitor, so that I can know my student’s learning, at least from this point of view. I know many students feel quite nervous about learning this particular skill, having talked to them this term.

I’ve unpacked the printer, which came flat-pack, self-assembly and now, Finally, I’m having a go at doing a print.

The handbook asks me to ‘flash the firmware’ so I google that and it tells me this:

‘The most basic example of firmware would be the BIOS that comes with the motherboard of your PC. … This process is called “flashing firmware” or simply “flashing”. This becomes necessary when the device becomes incompatible with newer operating systems or to simply enhance the performance of the device.’

So it means to overwrite the existing firmware or data. I’ve put in a FAT32 formatted memory stick and I’m going to attempt to ‘unpack’ it also a term I’m not familiar with, I google it:

It means; like a 1 GB game will take like 3 sec to download but after the 1 GB is finished downloading It will “Unpack” or just restart the download and it will take longer than the first download.

It means to extract the information from the Zip file, which is where its currently stored on the memory stick. If I don’t do this and turn it into a .BBF file then the Prusa can’t read/see it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4wBpW8UWx4 – link to a guy talking about his first prints.

So exciting to get going with this and to work out that I actually love learning new things once I take the first leap. For me, its getting started that is the main comfort-zone issue. I also am getting in-person advice from a technician at Chelsea who has these printers up and running. I’m going to pack this one into my bicycle basket and cycle it over to get his input on why the material (the filament) won’t connect to the plate.

I did take the Prusa to Chelsea and learned that I’d done a good job assembling it which was a relief. I will make a filmed section detailing this because it was a key part of my learning how to ‘befriend’ the equipment. I would like to ask my participants if they also have a sense of making friends with technical equipment. I know that this is also a relationship that you can have with your work as artist. I know that can sound pretentious but actually the relationship that you build with yourself around your work and your comfort zone is the most important one of your life. It becomes the bond that will sustain you even after you are in a studio far from University life, and throughout the coming years when you are up against the slings and arrows of trying to forge a pathway as an artist.

The information that comes with this printer is really excellent, lowest-common-denominator, stuff. You can access so much online support and the accompanying booklet was also extremely accessible. This is a link to Josef Prusa talking through using the Prusa mini = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA954VvdquA

The problem was the filament-extrusion nozzle was incorrectly positioned. The technician showed me how to solve this and also gave me a bottle of solution to clean the plate because it has to be spotless. I find it difficult to ask for help and recognise that students will also be in this position. I’m wondering how I can be the most approachable when I’m in the studios so that students can ask for help when they’re feeling like people are assuming that they already know something!

My research question aims to explore how a digital immigrant/visitor could become proficient in a digital skill in order to teach a digital resident/native. I have begun to find material which discusses this theme and was interested to read this piece from ARTNET which suggests that art educators are struggling to keep up with current emerging technologies. Referenced in the article is a 2019 State of Art Education Survey which shows that  52.2 % of art teachers want to learn more about teaching digital art effectively, but only 21.9 % of art teachers feel comfortable actually teaching a digital arts curriculum. This has been my experience with some colleagues being excited by learning digital skills compared with others actively avoiding anything digital.

Colleges really need to address this if they are to stay up with the game, never mind be leading it. This piece suggests that colleges are now realising that they need to move quickly in order to catch up with the developments and I would argue that their first priority is to offer quality training to improve the skills of their art-educators. My experience of learning how to use Photoshop through taking an internal UAL course was not great – the tutor could not cater for the wide-ranging abilities of her students and this was extremely problematic. This was all that was on offer at the time (5 yrs ago), but since then we’ve been encouraged to access Linkedin Learning which is much more efficient on many levels and I’ve found that to be succinct and accessible. I would like to interview colleagues to find out how they learn and which of the resources available are most likely to appeal to them and why.

There are currently programmes in many colleges, offering students the opportunity of learning to teach on the job such as ArtsTemps or student-ambassadorships which have many benefits. The students, as recent graduates, know the student experience in the moment and consequently can offer first-hand advice to educators and students alike. As well as knowing the college system, they will know what the weak points are, so their input could be vital in shaping the college’s offer. Alongside the experience of established arts-educators, this could be a powerful combination.

The article I’m referencing can be found here: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/art-school-tech-adapt-1742802 Sabrina Faramarzi, December 24, 2019.

‘One thing is clear: many artists won’t just naturally begin incorporating technology into their work without schools teaching them how. In a 2016 report, “Discovering the Post-Digital Art School,” arts educators Charlotte Webb and Fred Deakin note that “the notion of a current generation of young digital natives who inherently understand the internet with all its culture, grammar, and protocols, and who can effortlessly create innovative digital content and projects in ways that their teachers could never understand, is now acknowledged as simply a paranoid myth.

Are you a sculptor? A painter? An illustrator? For decades, art students starting out have asked themselves these questions. But these categories could look very different in the near future, as art schools belatedly attempt to incorporate new technology into their curricula. 

Earlier this year, one of the world’s most prestigious art schools, The Royal College of Art in London, announced plans to expand its curriculum to include science and technology. It was a watershed moment that suggested some art educators are finally understanding that these subjects need to be part of the academy for it to survive the digital age. 

But how can art schools adapt to this new paradigm, and how will the changes inform the kind of art that will be made in the future? 

There’s a creative computing course currently being instigated at Camberwell and I would really like to get views on the ideas raised in this article from the staff and students of that course.