AHHE FOR THE REFLECTIVE CONSERVATOIRE:Reform and transition in a conservatoire

Negotiating with tradition: Curriculum reform and institutional transition in a conservatoire

by Celia Duffy, Royal Conservatoire of Scotland, UK

published as http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/12/2-3/169.full.pdf+html

The Royal Conservatoire of Scotland has recently transformed its curriculum through a process of curriculum reform. This has been a major institutional transition and has challenged many of the traditional practices of the conservatoire. Taking the global thinking on curriculum reform as its starting point, the conservatoire’s aspiration has been to open up the traditionally narrow conservatoire curriculum: to provide more flexibility in terms of student choice and, importantly not only for our particular institutional circumstances but also for the direction of travel in the creative professions, to provide opportunities to collaborate with other artistic disciplines. This article reflects on the process of this project, the challenges that we negotiated and the emerging outcomes.

AHHE FOR THE REFLECTIVE CONSERVATOIRE: Music, dance & arts education in Tagore

A poem in a medium not of words: Music, dance and arts education in Rabindranath Tagore’s Santiniketan

by Matthew Pritchard, Faculty of Music, University of Cambridge, UK

Published in Arts and Humanities in HE Humanities Special Issue 13 (1-2) 2014 Calls to Action and Exemplary Essays, http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/13/1-2/101.full.pdf+html

In light of recent attempts to defend the role of the arts in education against the effects of policies based on utilitarian principles, this paper examines the arts educational writings and practical projects of Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941) at Santiniketan in West Bengal, showing how they were motivated by a Romantic and Upanishadic philosophy centred on the anti-utilitarian concept of ‘surplus’.

While the development of Santiniketan’s present arts and music departments away from Tagore’s original ideals is acknowledged and traced, I argue that Tagore’s aesthetic and educational philosophy still contains much to challenge us. In many ways, his thought can be seen as more compatible with progressive and liberal arts education than the ideology of high modernism that developed at the same period in Europe.

AHHE for the Reflective Conservatoire: Music and consciousness

by David Clarke, International Centre for Music Studies, Newcastle University, UK
and
Eric Clarke, Faculty of Music, University of Oxford, UK

Published in Arts and Humanities in HE Humanities Special Issue 13 (1-2) 2014

Calls to Action and Exemplary Essays http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/13/1-2/77.full.pdf+html

If there is a topic on which the humanities might make a distinctive claim, it is that of consciousness—an essential aspect of human being. And within the humanities, music might make its own claims in relation to both consciousness and being human. To investigate this connection, David Clarke and Eric Clarke brought together a wide variety of contributors in the book Music and Consciousness: Philosophical, Psychological, and Cultural Perspectives (OUP, 2011). The collection contributes to debates in consciousness studies at large, but also maps out areas peculiar to music and consciousness. Additionally, it lays bare the sheer multiplicity of discourses that emerges when consciousness is approached from even a single field of inquiry, such as music. If this poses a challenge for arriving at any agreed notion of consciousness (in relation to music or otherwise), this instability is something that might be best embraced rather than ‘resolved’. While the study of music and consciousness affirms the importance of the humanities, this is not to foreclose dialogue with scientific disciplines, even as this means maintaining awareness of how the different discursive formations of the humanities and sciences may connote different—and frequently incommensurable—sensibilities and values.

Classics and the New Faces of Feminism Sandpit

by Liz Gloyn,

Department of Classics, Royal Holloway University of London

Originally published on Classically Inclined:

https://lizgloyn.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/classics-and-the-new-faces-of-feminism-sandpit/

and Parrhesia blogs, eg http://www.artsandhumanities.org/disciplines/classics/addressing-difficult-topics-in-the-classics-classroom/)

On Saturday 31st January, I spent the day at Senate House in London attending the Classics and the New Faces of Feminism sandpit, organised by my RHUL colleague Efi Spentzou and Genevieve Liveley from Bristol. Those of you who follow me on Twitter will have been very aware of this because I was livetweeting the event, using the hashtag #classfem – thanks to the marvellous Lucy Jackson, the various livetweeters have been gathered together into this ‘ere Storify, so if you weren’t able to make it, you can catch up on what went on. I was there to chair the panel on Classics, feminism and pedagogy (which given my recent outing with Cloelia felt very appropriate), but there were all sorts of other reasons that this event felt timely – not least, of course, that of entering the third trimester of my first pregnancy, and wondering how that is going to affect my future.

The reason this post has taken this long to appear is because it’s taken me this long to catch up with myself! It was an incredibly stimulating day, and my heartfelt thanks go out to Efi and Genevieve for organising it. The downside, of course, is that I spent most of Sunday half-asleep, and it’s taken until now to get myself on top of ‘normal’ jobs to have five minutes to write about the experience – but again, that’s one of the effects of doing a full-on extra work day in the third trimester, and a price I don’t begrudge in the slightest.

Some observations. First of all, the atmosphere was amazing. I’ve personally experienced the kind of buzz and enthusiasm in the room before – but that was at Feminism and Classics conferences, not on UK soil (although women as classical scholars came close). The fact that such an atmosphere could exist at an academic event seemed to be something of a surprise to some attendees, particularly the very high number of graduate students in attendance. The mood was also largely shaped by a very constructive and nurturing approach. Not that you could get away with saying anything (for instance, there was some lively debate about waves of feminism and which, if any, participants identified with), but the general mood was one of building connections and offering support. For instance, in the sandpit discussion section of the pedagogy panel, some grad students who were facing teaching for the first time next academic year aired their nerves about teaching potentially difficult and sensitive subjects – and had an entire room of more experienced teachers respond with advice, strategies and general cheerleading.

That buzz was partly generated by the international flavour of the day. The last panel on the program was to publicise the Eugesta network, and to encourage participants to engage with its events and submit to its journal. This meant we had representatives in the room from at least the US, France, Italy and Greece. The US contingent was particularly strong, as it included people like Nancy Rabinowitz, Barbara Gold and Judith Hallett, who were all involved in the founding and early years of the WCC and as such have been critical in creating the kind of environment I found in the US as a graduate student (and for which I am eternally grateful). I suppose that this is one of the so-far unsung benefits of globalisation – while there are still local or regional conditions which will only affect academics in a particular geographic area, there are wider issues of feminist practice, research and pedagogy where we can learn from each other’s distinct cultures and build cooperation for the future. The Eugesta network is a fantastic example of this, and I hope that it continues to build connections between academics and institutions.

More than buzz, the day produced a surprising amount of energy. Energy to do things. Given that one concern raised in the early sessions was how there seemed to be a diffusion of activism around the feminist project, particularly if compared to the second wave, the thirst for suggestions of what action we might take was palpable. Suggestions for action came in both little and big forms – deliberately choosing translations by women for classes and hand-outs; seeking to act collaboratively rather than competitively with women colleagues; seeking out international collaboration; using classical material to address contemporary issues like rape culture and as a tool for social justice; seeing ourselves as intersectional and thus tackling the problem that classics still has with supporting non-white students and academics; continuing to engage with feminist theory as it develops; reshaping the reception canon so that women’s writing won’t need to be reclaimed in future; and reconsidering where feminism happens on our course syllabi and in our students’ degree paths. There was something there for people at every career stage, both in terms of practical action in the coming weeks and months, and in aspirational or strategic terms.

One of the massive things for me to come out of the sandpit is the final push to do something that I will either be very proud of or profoundly regret, and quite possibly both. At the last Feminism and Classics conference, I expressed a desire for a body similar to the WCC in the UK. In my head, as I realised on Saturday, I had conceptualised this as something that I would do, as a sole heroic individual (hello, ivory tower model of scholarship), and that it would thus have to wait until I had the stability of a permanent position. At the sandpit, I mentioned this idea again – and was gently shocked by the level of enthusiasm and support for it. So I’m now starting to make some moves towards getting this actually set up and going, which is both terrifying and exciting. On the plus side, I do at least know that I can’t afford to overcommit myself – the impending arrival of a small infant rather precludes that – so while I can do some of the initial work in getting the ball rolling, I have an in-built reminder that I can’t take on too much. This, too, is quite important – there’s such a tendency for labour to land on those in the least stable conditions (PhD students, ECRs on fixed term contracts, independent researchers to name but a few), and I’m very keen to try to structure things so that we don’t end up with one or two of the usual suspects being overburdened.

But this is all in the future. For the time being, I’m delighted to have discovered the amount of enthusiasm and positivity around feminism within UK classics that was on show from all career stages at the sandpit, and I sincerely hope that this is only the beginning of things to come.

Classics and the New Faces of Feminism – a Postgrad’s Perspective

by Rhiannon Easterbrook,

Classics and Ancient History, University of Bristol

(see also http://www.artsandhumanities.org/conferences/classics-and-the-new-faces-of-feminism-sandpit/

It’s a common narrative that feminism is divided, that it’s riddled with infighting and that we’re too busy turning on each other to achieve our goals. This isn’t surprising as it plays into the familiar idea that women can’t really be friends because we’ll always be in competition with each other. It may be that what we want is equality (or gynarchy, according to some people) but our innate moral weakness always sabotages us and we end up getting what we deserve (inequality) instead.

Well, the truth is that at the Classics and the New Faces of Feminism Sandpit, there was disagreement. And why wouldn’t there be? When different generations of scholars from a number of countries, all with their own life experiences and interests come together, it’s bound to happen. However, just because there was disagreement over some issues, doesn’t mean that there wasn’t also a considerable amount of unity.

As a postgraduate researcher, I am relatively inexperienced when it comes to the world of academic conferences but, to me and to others as well, it seemed that this event was extraordinary. From the moment I walked in, the atmosphere was such that I knew it would be a good day.

What struck me most was that all participants went with the sincere intention of both imparting and gaining knowledge. Senior academics brought in insight and experience, not just in the application of feminist theory but in teaching. People at earlier points in their careers came with fresh, new ideas and approaches and were received well.

Some postgrads expressed anxieties about teaching for the first time and were met with support and helpful suggestions that ranged from the need to be straightforward and matter-of-fact about more explicit texts to the importance of self-care. Remembering that we are all human beings who have needs that go beyond access to the right texts and AV equipment is critical for our wellbeing. In a similar vein, discussion about how different institutions make allowances (or don’t) for family commitments was a reminder of how there are still structural barriers against women achieving full equality in academia.

Where contention loomed on the horizon, it was in regards to where feminism is heading. While the first panel, chaired by Vanda Zajko, saw Nancy Rabinowitz, Barbara Gold, and Ika Willis emphasise the value of previous feminist scholarship and second-wave feminists, it also introduced a theme which recurred later in the day: how to be inclusive of different identities. Several participants asserted that “we need to do better on race and class” and that disability is too often ignored. However, others were concerned that a concentration on identity politics might lead to too much focus on the individual. More participants still expressed concerns that a move from women’s studies to gender studies has been sidelining the experience of women and putting more focus on men in yet another discipline.

This fed into a discussion later on in the day about what fourth-wave feminism might be and whether any of us identify with the movement. At this point a generational gap became more apparent. For some younger feminists like me, social media plays a role in the formation of our opinions and the development of our understanding. Access to a wide range of experiences by women from all walks of life has challenged many of our assumptions and attitudes. Yet, as some people pointed out, there is the danger that this approach becomes detached from a theoretical grounding or that virtual interaction displaces more traditional forms of activism.

However, for all of this lively debate it became apparent there was real solidarity. Whether papers were on literature, or pedagogy, or science, there was the sense that, in coming together, we could create a network of mutual support. Admittedly, there was anger too – and rightly so – but I have high hopes that this anger will be channelled productively. Towards the end of the day, there emerged a strong will to capitalise on the successes of the day and work together. It’s not yet clear what exactly will come out of Classics and the New Feminism but be prepared!

AAC&U Getting the Assessment of Student Learning in College Right

The VALUE Breakthrough:

Getting the Assessment of Student Learning in College Right

https://secure2.aacu.org/store/detail.aspx?id=GMSVALUE

There is a sea change afoot in the United States. A consensus has emerged among educators and employers regarding the kind of education college students need for success in work, civic participation and democratic citizenship, and life in the twenty-first century. Access and completion—goals on which federal and state legislators, policy makers, and the general public focus far too narrowly—are not enough. Given the challenges the United States faces in the economy and in the global community, higher education needs to focus with new intensity on providing the kinds of learning that build needed capacity, both for graduates and for society as a whole. Moreover, the growth in college-eligible students, which is occurring mainly in socioeconomic groups that have never been well served by higher education, requires new attention to what all students—including first- and second-generation students—gain from their time in college. This is the new frontier for assessment and accountability: documenting what college students know and can do with their learning.

What should college graduates know and be able to do? The consensus among educators and employers was captured clearly in a 2013 Hart Research Associates study of for-profit and nonprofit employers—the fourth such survey in six years with consistent results—that was released in conjunction with the announcement by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) of its Employer–Educator Compact. That consensus reflects almost exactly the key capacities identified through the association’s Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) initiative as the LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes : students need, across and beyond content knowledge, high competence in inquiry and analysis, critical and creative thinking, integrative and reflective thinking, written and oral communication, quantitative literacy,
information literacy, intercultural understanding, and teamwork and problem solving. As an illustration, here is just a sample of the findings of the Hart study:

• Nearly all employers (93 percent) agree that a “demonstrated capacity to think critically, communicate clearly, and solve complex problems is more important than [a job candidate’s] undergraduate major.”
• “More than nine in ten [employers] say it is important that those they hire demonstrate ethical judgment and integrity; intercultural skills; and the capacity for continued new learning.
• Eight in ten employers say that, whatever their major field, all college students need broad learning in the liberal arts and sciences.
• More than 75 percent of the employers call for more emphasis on five key areas: “critical thinking, complex problem-solving, written and oral communication, and applied knowledge in real-world settings.”
• “Employers endorse several educational practices as potentially helpful in preparing college students for workplace success,” including “practices that require students to conduct research and use evidence-based analysis,” to “gain in-depth knowledge in the major and analytic, problem-solving, and communication skills,” and to “apply their learning in real-world settings.” ⁴

Tellingly, employers put their compensation dollars into the jobs that require these kinds of higher education learning outcomes. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce economist Anthony Carnevale reports that “from a federal database analyzing qualifications for 1,100 different jobs, there is consistent evidence that the highest salaries apply to positions that call for intensive use of liberal education capabilities regardless of formal educational requirements, including: writing, inductive and deductive reasoning, judgment and decision-making, problem solving, social/interpersonal skills, mathematics, originality.” ⁵ Indeed, the 220 jobs in the upper quintile with regard to the extent to which they require these liberal education capabilities pay on average more than double what the 220 jobs in the lowest quintile pay. These are the key capacities that all students seeking at least the kind of compensation necessary for a middle-class existence will need in the twenty-first century because, according to Levy and Murnane, the jobs that don’t require these capacities will be “done by computers and low wage workers abroad.” ⁶ In their illuminating analysis of how work is changing in the twenty-first century, Levy and Murnane say that “we cannot predict with accuracy the occupations that will grow fastest in the future or the precise tasks that humans will perform. Nonetheless, it is a safe bet that the human labor market will center on three kinds of work: solving unstructured problems, working with new information, and carrying out non-routine manual tasks.” ⁷

The challenge to make high-quality learning a priority for all college students is clear. What will be higher education’s response?

Linköping Conference on Enriching History Teaching and Learning in HE

Enriching History Teaching and Learning : Challenges, Possibilities, Practice: Proceedings of the Linköping Conference on History Teaching and Learning in Higher Education

ed. by David Ludvigsson and Alan Booth

Full text at http://liu.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:786270/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Historians are increasingly intent upon building firmer knowledge and understanding about the ways students learn history and the strategies and curricula that lead to effective learning. In Enriching History Teaching and Learning the contributors report on studies that provide important knowledge and insights about teaching and learning history in higher education. They discuss issues such as the supervision of undergraduate dissertations, the challenges of fostering critical reading, the value of making history students co-producers in the learning process, and how historians learn to become history teachers.

Contents

David Ludvigsson & Alan Booth: Introduction. Building Knowledge, Building Connections
Stefan Ekecrantz, Jenny Parliden & Ulf Olsson: Teaching-research Nexus or Mock Research? Student Factors, Supervision and the Undergraduate Thesis in History
KG Hammarlund: Continuous Assessment of Historical Knowledge and Competence: Challenges, Pitfalls, and Possibilities
Alison Twells: ‘More than gaining a mark’: Students as Partners and Co-producers in Public History and Community Engagement
Friederike Neumann: How Does a Historian Read a Scholarly Text and How do Students Learn to do the Same?
Andrei Sokolov: The Development of Students’ Critical Thinking through Teaching the Evolution of School History Textbooks: A case study
György Nováky: The Same History for All? Tuning History
Alan Booth: How Historians Develop as Teachers

That’s Offensive! Criticism, Identity, Respect by Stefan Collini

That’s Offensive!

CRITICISM, IDENTITY, RESPECT

STEFAN COLLINI

Manifestos for the 21st Century

That’s Offensive! examines the common assertion that to criticize someone else’s deeply held ideas or beliefs is inherently offensive. This idea, Stefan Collini argues, is unfortunately reinforced by two of the central requirements of an enlightened global politics: treating all people with equal respect and trying to avoid words or deeds that compound existing social disadvantages. In this powerfully argued book, Collini identifies a confused form of relativism and a well-meaning condescension at the heart of such attitudes. Instead, Collini suggests that one of the most profound ways to show our respect for other people is by treating them as capable of engaging in reasoned argument and thus as equals in intellect and humanity.

Collini’s ideas address deep issues about identity and human agency. His maxims — do not be so afraid of giving offense that you allow bad arguments to pass as though they were good ones; and do not allow your concern for the disadvantaged to exempt their beliefs from the kind of rational scrutiny to which your own must also be subjected — offer guiding principles for dialogue in our world today.

Humanities World Report 2015 – articulating values

Articulating Values

From the Humanities World Report 2015 by Poul Holm, Arne Jarrick and Dominic Scott

By way of our interviews and literature review, we have identified a bounded set of answers to the question of the value of humanities research. They are as follows:

Intrinsic value: humanities research has a value in and of itself. Even if it leads to other benefits (as listed below), it should also be pursued for its own sake.

Social value: the humanities benefit society in a number of ways. They help create tolerance and understanding between citizens, thereby leading to social cohesion. They aid decision-making, especially on the complex ethical issues that confront society as a whole. In addition, they can benefit society by challenging established positions (see also ‘critical thinking’ below).

Cultural heritage: the humanities enable citizens to understand, preserve and sometimes challenge their national heritage and culture.

Economic value: there are direct economic benefits from humanities research, for example in publishing, media, tourism and, of course, the training humanities scholars provide to their students, who go into the job market across a wide range of professions.

Contribution to other disciplines: humanities research feeds into other fields, most obviously the social sciences, but also into medicine, computer science and engineering/design.Innovation: the humanities deal with questions of motivation, organisation and action, which are essential components of creativity and entrepreneurship, and so the humanities promote a culture of innovation.

Critical thinking: it is of the essence of the humanities to develop critical thinking. This is epitomised by the Socratic tradition in philosophy, but by no means confined to that discipline.

Personal and spiritual development: humanities research can enhance one’s personal and spiritual wellbeing through the study of different texts and traditions – religious, philosophical or spiritual.

Aesthetic appreciation: literary research, art history and musicology promote aesthetic discrimination, enhancing the appreciation and enjoyment of artistic works.

We argue that this list represents a plausible taxonomy of the most prominent attempts to articulate the value of the humanities around the world.

The Art of the Reflective Practitioner: Guildhall Reflective Conservatoire Conference 2015

Professor Helena Gaunt, Vice Principal and Director of Academic Affairs at the Guildhall School of Music & Drama

With rapid change an accepted norm, renewing our practices in Higher Education increasingly demands profound reflection. This is critical for the arts and humanities not least in contexts of major funding cuts and perceptions in some quarters of irrelevance. In the performing arts particular challenges lie in continuing to champion fundamental values of human connection, artistic expression, creative passion and determination to excel alongside enabling fresh thinking outside the box, artistic and educational innovation, and interdisciplinary risk-taking. These challenges ask us to clarify what we must take with us as we move forwards, what new activities we can take on, and sometimes most significantly what we can/must leave behind.

it is more important than ever then that we deepen exchange and build community across disciplines in order to make a step-change collaboratively to strengthen the voices of our disciplines in contemporary Higher Education, and embody their vital place in shifting societies. There is no doubt that some of the best artists and creative practitioners are highly reflective in their work (and some take this further into arenas of practice-based research). Nevertheless, education and training has not always championed such reflective practice, and at times it has been side-lined into supporting studies disconnected from practical activity where it easily becomes marginalised or de-valued; indeed some concerns continue that reflection obstructs the creative process. The task of continuing to evolve meaningful and generative forms of reflection for all those engaged in these disciplines remains a considerable one. Equally, the task of bringing such valuable developments into wide professional use within the creative industries is significant.

The art of the reflective practitioner sits at the core of what it is to lead the arts and humanities in higher education (as individuals in our own creative practice, in teaching, in developing curricula and in thinking institutionally), just as it underpins the development of successful graduates. The Reflective Conservatoire Conference has been grappling with these issues in the performing arts since 2006, working at the processes and positioning of reflection at personal, curriculum and institutional levels. Held triennially, its fourth edition will be held from February 26 to March 1, 2015. This will engage with several elements of the paradigm shift that we are currently experiencing:

In the interface between higher education and the professions, rigid conceptions of transmission or apprenticeship with essentially one-way traffic from professional to student are making way for more dynamic spaces of two-way exchange and shared exploration. In addition, a renaissance in interdisciplinary work and increasing appetite for divergent thinking about performance and relationships between artists and audiences mean that higher education is becoming a “go to” laboratory space for experimentation and risk-taking encounters.
Practitioners are operating on a global stage in the arts and are increasingly moved to produce work that crosses cultures and dismantles traditional boundaries. Higher Education inevitably needs to reflect this global landscape.
Assumptions about the purpose and value of the performing arts are constantly being tested in such fluid environments. This highlights the importance of establishing genuine roots. Ultimately, it is the fundamental values of the disciplines and the core skills embedded within these that will provide the sustainability of the disciplines and support artists through life long careers. Emerging practitioners undoubtedly need to embody their values, and be comfortable with articulating them and reappraising them continually.

Our theme for the conference this year is therefore ambitious and challenging: “Creativity and Changing Cultures”. Within this, we will have sessions on visioning future artistic learning environments, exchange and learning through the body across different art forms, creative entrepreneurship and connecting with audiences, supporting peer learning and communities of practice, transforming skills of feedback, deepening enquiry and research as artistic practitioners, and the role of improvisation in developing core musicianship/artistic craft. We will showcase innovative work and recent research, using these to stimulate debate about how we continue to develop performing arts education. We will juxtapose practical workshops, research papers, performances and roundtables, and will generate dialogue and collaboration between diverse professionals in the arts, knowing that creative exchange and critical reflection between them will catalyze fresh thinking and new perspectives.

We have a leading role to play in repositioning the multi-layered value of our institutions. Experience in the arts, for example, of embedding practical and professional experience within programmes, navigating individual and collective creativity, or embracing novel assessment practices that catalyze reflective practice have much to offer young people, professional practices and wider society.

Arts and Humanities as Higher Education

an international research group and network, founder of Arts and Humanities in Higher Education journal