反思:探索写作在实践导向研究中的作用

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Writing in Creative Practice Pub Date : 2020-02-01 DOI:10.1386/jwcp_00007_1
J. Quinn
{"title":"反思:探索写作在实践导向研究中的作用","authors":"J. Quinn","doi":"10.1386/jwcp_00007_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The phrase ‘writing up’ is often framed as the point where a research project is nearing its end, with only a summarizing thesis between a student and their completion. This text seeks to interrogate this dichotomy between research practice and writing. Instead, the text engenders reflective writing as a constant undercurrent of dialogue that continually shapes research through reflective thought. The text implements concepts from two key texts to meet these ends: Kamler and Thompson’s Helping Doctoral Students Write: Pedagogies for Supervision and Bolt and Barrett’s Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. The first of the texts problematizes the notion of a formal ‘writing up’ stage often cited by students and supervisors in research study, arguing instead for a shift towards a more dynamic role for writing in research, or indeed writing as research. The second of the contributing texts presents Barbara Bolt’s notion of the ‘exegesis’ as ancillary to this thought – outlining written practice in arts research as an intrinsic, generative process, married to any practical outcome. Using the rhetoric outlined in these two references, this article then summarizes with an application of the notion of the ‘exegesis’ to an assortment of personal written texts, such as reflective journal entries and assessed written works across three years of postgraduate study. Herein lies the key claim of this article – that exegesis permeates every meaningful or developmental step of practice-led research, forming a crucial reciprocal relationship between visual and written work not unlike other hybridized methodologies outlined by authors such as Mieke Bal in her text, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities: A Rough Guide.","PeriodicalId":38498,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice","volume":"13 1","pages":"243-258"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflecting on reflection: Exploring the role of writing as part of practice-led research\",\"authors\":\"J. Quinn\",\"doi\":\"10.1386/jwcp_00007_1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The phrase ‘writing up’ is often framed as the point where a research project is nearing its end, with only a summarizing thesis between a student and their completion. This text seeks to interrogate this dichotomy between research practice and writing. Instead, the text engenders reflective writing as a constant undercurrent of dialogue that continually shapes research through reflective thought. The text implements concepts from two key texts to meet these ends: Kamler and Thompson’s Helping Doctoral Students Write: Pedagogies for Supervision and Bolt and Barrett’s Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. The first of the texts problematizes the notion of a formal ‘writing up’ stage often cited by students and supervisors in research study, arguing instead for a shift towards a more dynamic role for writing in research, or indeed writing as research. The second of the contributing texts presents Barbara Bolt’s notion of the ‘exegesis’ as ancillary to this thought – outlining written practice in arts research as an intrinsic, generative process, married to any practical outcome. Using the rhetoric outlined in these two references, this article then summarizes with an application of the notion of the ‘exegesis’ to an assortment of personal written texts, such as reflective journal entries and assessed written works across three years of postgraduate study. Herein lies the key claim of this article – that exegesis permeates every meaningful or developmental step of practice-led research, forming a crucial reciprocal relationship between visual and written work not unlike other hybridized methodologies outlined by authors such as Mieke Bal in her text, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities: A Rough Guide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"243-258\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1386/jwcp_00007_1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jwcp_00007_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“写作”一词通常被定义为一个研究项目即将结束的时刻,学生和他们完成之间只有一篇总结论文。本文试图质疑研究实践和写作之间的这种二分法。相反,文本产生了反思性写作,这是一股持续的对话暗流,通过反思性思维不断塑造研究。为了达到这些目的,本文采用了两个关键文本中的概念:Kamler和Thompson的《帮助博士生写作:监督教育学》和Bolt和Barrett的《研究实践:创造性艺术探究方法》。第一篇文章对学生和导师在研究中经常引用的正式“写作”阶段的概念提出了质疑,转而主张写作在研究中扮演更具活力的角色,或者说写作是研究。第二个贡献文本提出了Barbara Bolt的“注释”概念,作为这一思想的辅助——概述了艺术研究中的书面实践是一个内在的、生成的过程,与任何实际结果相结合。利用这两篇参考文献中概述的修辞,本文总结了“注释”的概念在各种个人书面文本中的应用,如反思性期刊条目和三年研究生学习中评估的书面作品。这就是本文的关键主张——注释渗透到实践主导的研究的每一个有意义或发展的步骤中,在视觉和书面作品之间形成了至关重要的相互关系,这与Mieke Bal等作者在其著作《人文旅行概念:粗略指南》中概述的其他混合方法并无不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reflecting on reflection: Exploring the role of writing as part of practice-led research
The phrase ‘writing up’ is often framed as the point where a research project is nearing its end, with only a summarizing thesis between a student and their completion. This text seeks to interrogate this dichotomy between research practice and writing. Instead, the text engenders reflective writing as a constant undercurrent of dialogue that continually shapes research through reflective thought. The text implements concepts from two key texts to meet these ends: Kamler and Thompson’s Helping Doctoral Students Write: Pedagogies for Supervision and Bolt and Barrett’s Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. The first of the texts problematizes the notion of a formal ‘writing up’ stage often cited by students and supervisors in research study, arguing instead for a shift towards a more dynamic role for writing in research, or indeed writing as research. The second of the contributing texts presents Barbara Bolt’s notion of the ‘exegesis’ as ancillary to this thought – outlining written practice in arts research as an intrinsic, generative process, married to any practical outcome. Using the rhetoric outlined in these two references, this article then summarizes with an application of the notion of the ‘exegesis’ to an assortment of personal written texts, such as reflective journal entries and assessed written works across three years of postgraduate study. Herein lies the key claim of this article – that exegesis permeates every meaningful or developmental step of practice-led research, forming a crucial reciprocal relationship between visual and written work not unlike other hybridized methodologies outlined by authors such as Mieke Bal in her text, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities: A Rough Guide.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Writing in Creative Practice
Journal of Writing in Creative Practice Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Disfigment Bankrupsea Working Words: Words as tools to visualize embodied labour Towards a ‘spatial writing’: O Complex Mass Dialogue with St. K(aterina): An attempt at a prayer – a (not the) divine comedy Eight poor copies (electric speech)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1