I've been working to institute studio-model pedagogy in the context of the Digital Media for the Artist course for quite a while. In fact I started with that idea in the fall of 2006, my first term teaching at UNCSA, but I ran into numerous roadblocks that had little to do with the model and much to do with me coming to know my audience and context. Now that I have some aspects of those critical factors better accounted for in my design, the studio-model is clicking.
It was my own experience with the studio-model as a visual art student that keyed it in for me. The atmosphere and structure of studio art classes was something I really enjoyed. People were motivated and going about their work. Instructors would give an occasional presentation or demonstration for the whole-class, but otherwise they circulated about the studio, pausing to look at and/or comment on the efforts of individuals. In sum, everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves and also learning a great deal. This is what I sought to re-create as an atmosphere or ethos in the DMA course.
The situation presented some differences that were somewhat troublesome. First, the DMA course is required, hence people are not always motivated to take the course. So I have to work pretty hard to: 1) make it as interesting as possible, and 2) structure it so folks who are not motivated (and even ones who are) do not end up with structure-hunger; given that the environment of UNCSA is in general highly scheduled; chill--space can easily be interpreted as fill-in-with-something-else space).
Second, more than an occasional presentation is needed to get the content across to students (in short there is more to teaching a course like DMA --in terms of needing to introduce conceptual and procedural content-- than there is in teaching studio art courses).
BUT having said that, there are striking similarities as well. The person-at-their-easel is fairly comparable to the person-at-their-computer. By definition, both environments invite hands-on and project-driven approaches. So, I have done whatever I can in the way of aligning the physical space with the studio ethos, playing the role of DJ in providing suitable background music (which virtually almost all studio-based teachers report they do), and keeping the atmosphere open yet structured.
In talking with a colleague recently, though, I realized I was missing a major opportunity to add conversation into the pedagogical mix. I am a huge fan of conversation-based pedagogy, yet the studio-model seems to not invite it; project-based learning seems to be a much better fit. Yet in my recollections of studio-based environments as a learner, there was always informal conversation during class (which I allow and encourage in DMA as well) AND there was also semi-formal conversation at the end of each session around putting the day's work on display and having a discussion-based critique. The instructor would offer feedback, sometimes on individual pieces, sometimes re: group characteristics (i.e., everyone needs to work on texture, etc.), and students would enter into the conversation. It was also a very powerful indirect teaching to simply see one's own work next to other's who were working on the same assignment. I mean a lot of metacognitive, self-evaluative work took place in that space without the teacher having to say anything.
So this is my aim for next term and beyond is to introduce critique into my studio-matrix in DMA, by projecting and talking about different pieces of student work-in-progress. I think this represents the last piece of the puzzle for me. It solves problems related evaluation, communication, and structure. I now comment on the blogs that students create to address the homework aspects of DMA by reading, so they get feedback on their conceptual work and on their completed media projects, but by instituting critique I will be able to comment on the in-studio work students do, and their in-progress work on their media projects. I will of course continue to enjoy the banter and fun of spending time in-studio with them.
No comments:
Post a Comment