Many thanks to all who contributed to this discussion. Whilst a relatively small
sample, I'd like to try to sum up some of the expressed opinions:
- There's surprise that non-practitioners (in the creative arts/design)
supervise practice-based PhD's.
- I and others are surprised that it's possible to get a PhD that involves
practice supported by a 15000 word thesis (mine was 80000 plus four
products!). The closest thing to this that I'm aware of is the 10000/15000
word supporting discourse for PhD's through published papers which typically
require 6 academic journal papers of significant impact.
- It can be problematic determining what defines a practitioner in the creative
arts/design. I can only speak with any authority for industrial/product design
where I'd expect experience (duration tba) in a consultancy/in-house
environment that has seen designs progress to manufacture. A portfilio of
work is always a good indicator of such capability, but ultimately it's a
judgement call that may require an element of peer review. Where research
students may not be in this position (maybe having bachelors/masters
degrees), I believe it becomes all the more necessary for the supervisor to
have such experience.
- Multiple supervisors from a mix of academic/practitioner backgrounds can
give confidence to research students looking to employ practice-based
research methods.
- Academics with experience of practice and research supervision are in short-
supply.
- In the creative arts/design, practice-based research methods generally refer
to the execution of professional capability (e.g. fine art, industrial design,
graphic design) by the investigator as part of a research method.
- Practice-based research can be a form of action research.
- Practice on its own in the creative arts/design is not academic research.
- The 8.14 train is a popular service for academics heading into central London.
|