TPP Reflective posts – Fernanda Palmieri

Reflection 1

^{Workshop 2 – Aims of Art Education – Group work}

Ontology, Epistemology and Practice

It was interesting to be able to collectively organise these concepts/values (given to us in Workshop 2 – Aims of Art Education) in a triangle-cycle diagram. The idea to assess the concepts/values against a pre-established criterion: Knowledge (Epistemology), Society (Ontology) and Skills (Practice). And to arrange the three categories in relation to each other, came from the book A Will to Learn: Being a Student in an Age of Uncertainty (Barnett 2007).

In the book, Barnett argues that, historically, higher education has been founded mainly on epistemological and practical pillars, but that a third ontological pillar must be recognised and considered, the pillar related to being and becoming, embodied in education as the will-to-learn. Without will, he argues, nothing is possible, “there is no energy neither the right conditions for one to embark on and commit with a long personal project such as higher education” (Barnett 2007).

While one might argue that Art Education is and has been based and sustained by these 3 pillars (and here it is interesting to verify how balanced those 3 sides of the triangle turned out to be in our diagram), most of its mechanisms, such assessment and learning outcomes, which are structural to higher education, do not contemplate the ontological pillar.

As a group, we decided to place ‘human flourishing’ at the centre of out triangle-cycle diagram. However, until we can grasp the significance of the Ontological pillar in higher education, the idea of a holistic assessment, for example, is hollow and not possible, let alone the idea of ‘human flourishing’.

References:

Barnett, R. (2007) A will to learn: Being a Student in an Age of Uncertainty. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Reflection 2

^{Workshop 3 – Assessment and Feedback}

AI x Learning Outcomes

In the post Reflection 1, I introduced the structural tripod ontology-epistemology-practice of higher education (Barnett 2007) and briefly reflected on the past and present significance of the ontological pillar. In this post, I propose to continue this discussion by looking ahead, to a future that is already present, where artificial intelligence (AI) tools are widely available to students, replacing sources of knowledge (epistemology) and the need to develop certain skills (practice).

In the past couple of years, the use of AI tools has increased exponentially among my students and, still, course aims and assessment methods continue to be outcome-based. If AI can produce the outcomes, what learning would be assessed? If AI can replace skills and make knowledge available, what would one be learning in higher education?

The discussion which argues against learning outcomes and/or outcome-based assessments is not new in higher education. Paul Kleiman, in his report “We Don’t Need Those Learning Outcomes”: assessing creativity and creative assessment (2017), argued for ‘a conceptual shift’ away from learning outcomes, and an assessment criterion based on expectations. He argued for a focus on performance, which in this case, could be understood as the learning process that encompasses all different fields of a creative subjective.

Could an ontological shift towards performance, or the process of being and becoming (Barnett 2007), be the starting point of higher education reinvention on this new technological era? I don’t know, but this question is now becoming fundamentally urgent.

References:

Barnett, R. (2007) A will to learn: Being a Student in an Age of Uncertainty. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Kleiman, P. (2017) “We Don’t Need Those Learning Outcomes”: assessing creativity and creative assessment. [online] Available at: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325059666_We_Don’t_Need_Those_Learning_Outcomes_assessing_creativity_and_creative_assessment> [Accessed 17 Mar 2025]

Reflection 3

Drawing Matters

Learning in a material world is different from learning in a digital world, but students are increasingly more comfortable, dependent and, somehow more interested in the digital world. In architectural education, drawing and model making which were once the vital tools for architectural thinking are being quickly replaced by digital tools, and most recently, by 3D digital tools which are similar to “gaming” platforms.

In my studio (BA Architecture at CSM) I insist on making drawing and model making central to the design practice, arguing that the translation of ideas from one’s brain and guts to their hands is different, freer and more direct, than the translation through a digital platform, which has its limitations, specific language and parameters, and works as a filter. But this insistence feels more and more like a personal battle instead of a pedagogical approach. And that is why I chose the reading Drawing laboratory: Research workshops and outcomes (Salamon 2018) for Workshop 1.

The article starts by confirming that, nowadays, drawing is presented to students at CSM as a voluntary pursuit, something not integral to the curriculum, and viewed as less essential. It then goes on to present and reflect on the ‘Drawing Laboratory’ experience that took place at CSM in 2015, which consisted of a series of independent workshops set up to explore the connection between the physical act of drawing and the encoding and retrieval process of human memory.

Based on this experience, the author concludes that the act of drawing supported participants of the ‘Drawing Laboratory’ to generate new creative content and approaches to their project work. And that indeed, it served as a mechanism for observing and measuring the act of remembering, arguing that when used to make sense of the world, drawing is a powerful tool that can help us to engage with and register reality in unique ways (Salamon 2018).

The reading was reassuring. The battle continues.

Reference:

Salamon, M. (2018) Drawing laboratory: Research workshops and outcomes. [online] Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal. Available at: <https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/99/175> [Accessed 17 Mar 2025]

Reflection 4

_{workshop 2 – hand out}

Aphorism | ˈafərɪz(ə)m |

A pithy observation which contains a general truth.

(Oxford Dictionary)

Becoming

I loved this idea that learning is something that you can incite, and that there is some truth in it. The aphorism above, which I picked from the handout given to us in Workshop 2, is followed by a series of annotations related to my teaching practice: “materials and stories that inspire, …briefs and situations that expose students to real-life struggles, …place at their hands the responsibility to investigate and respond, …take their personal views as starting points, …incite them to think and act = learning”.

Why does this idea capture my imagination? I think it is because many times, in my teaching career and learning journey, I experienced moments of intellectual euphoria, of breakthrough, or of clarity, when a new connection is made, and I can see a sparkle of light into the student’s eyes. These moments of authentic learning, which bring participants (students and tutors) into new relationships with the world (Barnett 2007), are the moments of exchange that fuels me to continue to teach year after year.

If “by locating when and why we have felt excited or fulfilled by an experience, we gain insight into the conditions that allow our creativity to flourish” (Amulya, 2004:1), then I can say that authentic teaching and learning is my call, it is what enables my creativity to flourish.

References

Amulya, J. (2004) What is reflective practice. [online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229021036_What_is_reflective_practice (Accessed 17 Mar 2025)

Barnett, R. (2007) A will to learn: Being a Student in an Age of Uncertainty. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Raven, L (2025). Reflective practice – Developing Personal and Professional Insights. Lecture – Wednesday 12th February [online] Available at:< https://moodle.arts.ac.uk/mod/folder/view.php?id=1378604> (Accessed 17 Mar 2025)