The research:creativity nexus
Abstract :
Creativity is now perceived as a ‘good thing’ by government, statutory bodies and industry and, along with research, is recognised as a high priority and a key to the future development and success of post-industrialised economies. It is thus timely to examine some of the assumptions about research and creativity that have emerged through policy papers and other forms of public debate, and which constitute a set of myths, assumptions and values within the sector itself.
This chapter focuses on research and creativity in art and design higher education, specifically upon what we term the research:creativity nexus, where enquiry, the search for new knowledge, meets innovation, which is the recognition of new understandings. Close parallels between the roles and functions of research and creativity in creative disciplines are recognised. We began with two explicit assumptions: that creativity is a core concept in art and design; and that research is a core practice in higher education. To articulate the potential impact of this nexus upon future student experience, it is essential to clarify the understanding of creativity and research within art and design higher education.
While the practices of the art and design disciplines are those generally understood as creative, the study or awareness of creativity as a human attribute has not played a significant role in the research agenda within our field. Our understanding within art and design education can benefit from examining emerging models of creativity from a range of other disciplines, models that can inform the field’s conception of creativity, and re-align disciplinary values with a coherent framing of research within the academic context.
As art and design has become established in the university research landscape, there has been considerable development of infrastructure, culture and understanding which enables us to recognise the ‘research engine’. The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) definition of research as “original investigation undertaken in order to gain knowledge and understanding . . ., which includes the invention and generation of . . ., artefacts including design . . ., where these lead to new or substantially improved insights” (RAE 01/2006 (O), p.80), is becoming more familiar in the art and design field although, as with the term ‘creativity’, informal or everyday interpretations continue to be operational. The distinction is drawn between professional practice within disciplines and research practice that seeks to advance disciplines. There is a tension between views of the latter as the primary focus within higher education, and the historic focus of art and design schools as providing preparation for advanced practice in the former. However we acknowledge that this tension is being reconciled and that an emerging positive consensus in relation to research is now evident in the creative disciplines.
It is our contention that the student learning experience can benefit from research into creativity within art and design, as well as from research that is itself informed by creative input. This examination of the research: creativity nexus will suggest repositioning our understanding of creativity and learning, of research in our field, and of the impact research in creative disciplines has beyond the academic field. We consider the research: creativity nexus through examination of the different perspectives and understandings of its constituent parts, before discussing how curriculum and learning models engage with the elements, and then outlining the strategic imperatives and benefits of engaging with the nexus model.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Is the research:creativity nexus working for your subject field ?
There were mixed views on the effectiveness of the research:creativity nexus, which reflected individual delegates’ personal experiences. Some believed that the integration of research into the curriculum was working better in the design subjects, and others that it was more effective where institutions had put in place clear structures to encourage this. But there was no unified view on these issues.
What could be changed to enhance the student experience of the research:creativity nexus ?
Discussion brought out some of the perceived barriers to the development of research cultures, and to the integration of research into teaching. By implication, these constitute an agenda for change in relation to this question. The barriers discussed included :
- the lack of any consensus of what constitutes the present state or boundaries of ‘knowledge’ in our fields, which makes our subject area fluid and exciting, but also makes evaluation of innovation in research difficult to achieve;
- a similar lack of consistency in the research methods of different researchers and subject fields, particularly between art and design, and between theory based and practice based methodologies;
- a lack of understanding, or distrust of, the research frameworks of the HE institutions in which we work, which may lead to ineffective exploitation of opportunities;
- the slow pace at which the development of practice based research methods, and the ways in which research in the Visual Arts can be justified, have been absorbed by academics in our field;
- the limited quantity and isolated nature of PhD activity, which is often not well disseminated, and can be isolated both from the taught curriculum and from external organisations in the creative industries;
- a belief that teaching is often informed more effectively by the informal research and practice undertaken by teaching staff, and the resulting interests and enthusiasms of the academic staff, rather than by identifiable, formalised research outcomes;
- a strongly held belief that visual knowledge itself, and ways of looking, are still considered less important as research than being able to articulate them – a belief reinforced by the primacy of the ‘reading list’ rather than the ‘viewing list’;
- a lack of understanding by some students that the common conception of research at school and UG level as collecting visual material to inform project work, is not sufficient to qualify as research at higher levels, unless used as a stimulus for reflective evaluation and critical engagement.