Can we talk about art and design as a coherent discipline community? Discuss!

  • Susan Orr: Professor of Creative Practice Pedagogy, Teaching and Learning Exchange
  • Alison Shreeve: Visiting Professor, Teaching and Learning Exchange

Abstract

Using our recently published book (Orr and Shreeve 2017) as a step off point Alison and I will discuss the ways that we developed the idea of the “sticky curriculum” as a means to surface commonalities between design curriculum and art curriculum. In deciding to write a book that encompassed art and design we were making a pitch that there was enough commonality to build an argument around a theory of pedagogy and curriculum for art and design. To make this case we drew on the work of Trowler (2014) and Harman and McDowell (2011) to help us define what we mean by the term discipline in higher education. As the book developed we noted that there were points where it became necessary to treat fine art and design as distinct disciplines. In this paper we will explore the ways that art and design education aligns and separates by exploring these moments of connection and rupture. For example the ideas of industry and professional practice play out in very different ways across art and design (and indeed across the many sub disciplines of art and design).

Orr, S and Shreeve, A (2017) Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum, Oxon. Routledge.

Questions

  • What do fine art and design curricula share and have in common?
  • How do the diverse disciplines taught in UAL connect, align, overlap and fracture?