A Better Iteration

Yoko has done a very good graphic for the proposed studio/laboratory model. One of the benefits of working with communication designers is when you get work like this. The labs are currently being conceived of as 12 credit point units, which would be three contact hours per week. They would provide the core honours experience within this new honours.

It’s a pdf so you know the drill:

Proposed lab scenario visualisation

Some Ideas That Arose

In the conversation after the planning day Fiona, Jeremy Parker, Jeremy Yuille, Yoko, and myself spent an hour or so debriefing ourselves. Some of the good ideas that came out that which I can remember:

• should have an honours board which includes key research participants or partners
• can the new fellows that the school has been included in some capacity in the studios by having themes relevant to their areas and having them participate?
• be good to write specific scenarios around the studio/labs to help others run with the idea
• do we need transitional studios to begin with where we define them around key school research clusters (meet with school research committee about this, and the Dean)

Sketch Notes Second Planning Day

Quick sketch notes following the second planning day. Perhaps the most striking experience of the day for me was that outcomes did not really move us forward, but they replayed quite plainly the same processes and conversations that the working group have had over the last six months.

In the introduction to the day I talked about how one of the outcomes of the day was to disseminate what the working group has been up to. So it was for us to get stuff out and spoken about, positively or negatively, and for some conversations to happen afterwards to help get information out there. So in terms of information there is hoped to be a centrifugal flow out. I also pointed out that like committees and working groups in general you develop an internal understanding and dialogue, what you might think of as a sort of idiolect of common assumptions and understandings. But this can mean that your assumptions disappear and you can lose sight of what matters, of what is problematic, of what needs attention, more thick description and detail. So one of the outcomes of the day is to get outside perspectives so we can see what needs attention, resourcing, and so on. Finally, the day is very much about process and we are not to spend time solving problems, arguing about fine detail. If you think there is a problem, write it down or tell us and we can capture it. If there is something good, ditto. Just park the problems and move on. It is the working group’s job to work out what to do with the issues, problems, concerns, possibilities, ideas and innovations that we collect.

Key question: What will make this laboratory/studio model work?

So, the moving forward. A rationale for the planning day was that we had done a lot of thinking in the working group and had reached a position where it felt like we were making big decisions, and that rather than just us making these decisions, we needed to take them out of the working group and to others for a) critique (are we on the right track? where, how? what other things/paths/tracks have we missed or need to be considered?) and b) to provide some thick description and body to the ideas so that what is the current skeleton of a program structure and some ideas about curriculum and what matters can be solidified and, well, fleshed out. While the material gathered and generated has not been collated yet, I don’t think this happened. What we did get was a lot of material and thick description around where the difficult parts of the program structure are, and what those problems actually look like. This did closely align with the working group, and so the relation of the studio to the supervisor and to the individual research practice is one such point. As is the role of the communication orientated subject. As is the actual role and activity within the studios. From our point of view this was quite affirming as it is a bit like convergent evolution where two different groups started from partly different points and arrived at very similar outcomes. This suggests that not only are we right in identifying the sticky or lumpy bits, but also that we need to spend a lot of time, relatively speaking, in explaining and contextualising these things.

As a consequence the planning day did not really take where the working group had gotten to and then expand on that. This, in retrospect, was partly my fault. I suspect the original schedule, where things like honours research was discussed before the studio scenario exercise, may have been more productive simply because as academics there was a lot they had and wanted to say about research. Getting this out and recognised, and then asking via the scenarios how this would happen in the studios, might have given a bit more context, for many struggled with the process orientated nature of the activity. Secondly, while I tried to be careful in using terms as only placeholders, and that they could be called anything, by describing the studios as studios (even though I routinely also called them a lab), and that they would have a leader or manager, saw nearly everyone treat them as studios with managers, where a manager was an administrative and not really an academic role. If I had simply called them research labs, with research directors, then I think things would have changed quite dramatically. This at least tells us how we need to name them.

These are the notes I made from each of the working table groups as they reported back. Red are problems. Green are good bits, brown direct quotes

Some Key Observations (not necessarily clear for others or before the day)

• The studio/lab model is key to the structure and experience of the program for staff and students, and in terms of framing research as an activity and practice. The opportunity to participate in these labs is the reason why you would apply for this program.
• Have a think about all those ways the program can innovate, for example having an Open Access curriculum – how can we do this? Why?
• We need a set of values for the program, these are not the graduate attributes, but these values do inform, justify and orientate the program
• Where should these laboratories happen (may sound obvious, but it certainly wasn’t to the participants)
• What sorts of participatory partnerships could there be (industry, Salford, individual companies)?
• Should it be a hub or centre of innovation/invention? What does that actually mean? What would it look like?
• We might need to progressively develop the studio/lab model over time, so first ones are set and predetermined in advance, to ensure they work, have key staff in place, and then see what knowledge, skills and resources are needed to then run new ones
• Just brain storming: one attached to screen hub, one to communications and social advocacy, one to Asian media, one on social media? What’s missing?
• Honours research: PhD requires qualitative change in disciplinary understanding from the point of view of the discipline. In the research outcome is a qualitative change in the student’s understanding of the discipline from the point of view of the student
• Staff development, or perhaps just existing, working labs, is needed so staff can understand what a research lab is
• Why should methods in honours have to be the only methods subject for students going on to HDR? Does thinking about that differently let us treat the methods subject differently? (And isn’t it the existence of honours – that is a thesis or project – and not the methods subject that means you do not need to do another methods subject in HDR?)
• Should applicants have to demonstrate some understanding already of the studio theme? Or perhaps this is not how we get students into honours but how we get them into specific studios?
• If the thesis/project and exegesis forms the examinable component does it matter if this is different to what the studio is? What does this constrain? What does this enable?

Questions and, Well, Questions

Tricky problems we don’t have answers to:

• how should studios/labs be chosen?
• when?
• should change to this model be progressive, so in year one themes pregiven, year two some meta themes and a project?
• when should new students know about them?
• how much work is it to be a studio director?
• how much work is it to supervise?
• should there be public artefacts as outcomes for each studio?
• should there be an honours website for student documentation and dissemination?
• should studios require any possible student or should students get directed on basis of qualification?
• should it be full time only?

Second Planning Day 2

Had an honours working group meeting today and we workshopped, rejigged and generally hacked the proposed schedule for the second planning day. The tools we need for the day are:

• lots of post it notes
• white board markers
• cameras
• scenario sheets
• textas, sharpies and coloured markers
• scissors
• tape
• A3 and A4 paper

The new schedule is:

Date: July 14
Time: 10am to 4pm.
Venue: Building 9, room 9.2.17 TBC

(This is not a decision making day but to help inform thinking and provide input to the development of the honours program.)

Bachelor of Media and Communication ([nnn]) (Hons)
[Media, Journalism, Public Relations, Advertising, Professional Communication, Communication Design, Creative Media]

[10:00 - 10:30]

• introductions
• outline of honours structure
• outline of the key outcomes sought from the day

[10:30 - 13:00]

Things to remember: idea is for four studio/labs, 10 students per studio. Supervision is not happening in labs, labs are about projects, supervision is about individual research practice/scholarship.

studio – laboratory scenario (more details available)

• develop project scenarios (10 minutes)
• define personas (20 minutes)
• develop contexts (20 minutes)
• develop and mark up (on timelines) implementation (30 minutes)

Introduce this with outline/discussion/speculations about what the lab/studio might or could be – themes, existing projects. Imagine there be a lab director and a separate supervisor. And these are some of the seeding questions/prompts to answer and think with;

• what is the role of the supervisor? The studio leader?
• what sorts of learning activities and assessment outcomes should could there be?
• what should could research be in honours? In this studio/lab model?
• what sorts of outcomes should could be expected?
• how should could these studios/labs and their outcomes relate to the school?
• what do you need to know to run a studio/lab?
• what resources do you need to run a studio/lab?
• what does a student need to know?
• should could studio/labs be thematically defined/themed?
• should could studio/labs be defined by projects? Both projects and themes?

At the end of all this each group will report back

[13:00 - 13:30]

Lunch (provided) and presentation about honours at University of Salford

[13:45 - 16:00]

Working in small groups, each group will deal with one of the following. Please make dot points, and each group will report back at the end:

• LEARNING: what learning activities and assessments should could there be in honours?
• GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES: what qualities are needed to do honours? What qualities would honours develop? What qualities should could honours develop?
• METHODS: how can the research methods subject contribute to and support the studio/labs and their outcomes? How can the methods subject be relevant to all the disciplines? What would make the methods subject different from existing ones so that it can be taught?
• MEDIA AND COMMUNICATION FUTURES: what sorts of things should could a subject like this include? What or how might it be different to the sorts of honours communication courses that are offered elsewhere?

Useful URLs for July 2nd through July 4th

These are my links for July 2nd through July 4th:

• UTS: Communication – UTS: Communication honours program – Communication Honours at UTS
• UWS: Bachelor of Communication (Honours) – B.Comm honours at UWS
• Bachelor of Creative Arts (Honours) – Courses and Programs – The University of Queensland, Australia – Bach. Creative Arts Honours at UQ
• Bachelor of Multimedia Design(Honours) – Courses and Programs – The University of Queensland, Australia – Bachelor of Multimedia Des Honours at UQ
• Bachelor of Communication (Honours) – Courses and Programs – The University of Queensland, Australia – Bachelor of Communication Honours at UQ

Useful URLs for July 2nd

These are my links for July 2nd:

• Journalism & Mass Communication Field of Study – part of the Bachelor of Arts(Honours) – Courses and Programs – The University of Queensland, Australia – Journalism and Mass Comm honours at UQ
• Communication and Cultural Studies Field of Study – part of the Bachelor of Arts(Honours) – Courses and Programs – The University of Queensland, Australia – Communication and Cultural Studies honours at UQ
• Griffith University | Bachelor of Multimedia with Honours – Nathan – Bachelor of Multimedia Honours at Griffith
• Griffith University | Bachelor of Photography with Honours – South Bank (QCA) – Bachelor of Photography with honours, Griffith
• Griffith University | Bachelor of Animation with Honours – South Bank (QCA) – Bachelor of Animation with Honours, Griffith

Useful URLs for July 2nd

These are my links for July 2nd:

• Griffith University | Bachelor of Film and Screen Media Production with Honours – South Bank (QCA) – Bachelor Film and Screen Media Prod with Honours, Griffith
• Griffith University | Bachelor of Digital Media with Honours – Gold Coast (QCA) – Bachelor of Digital Media with Honours, Griffith
• Griffith University | Bachelor of Design with Honours – South Bank (QCA) – B.Des honours at Griffith.
• QUT Bachelor of Journalism (Honours) – Program outline, entry details and the like for journalism honours program.
• Creative Industries Honours at QUT – Course outline, entry requirements and the like for QUT's Bachelor of Creative Industries (Honours)

Lunch Guest

The second honours planning day looks like it will have a guest participant. Dr. Andrew Cooper, from the Faculty of Arts, Media and Social Sciences, University of Salford, is dropping by RMIT. So he’s going to participate for a while in the planning day, and also over lunch give us an overview of the honours programs in the faculty at Salford. Exchanges in honours would be a very nice thing to be able to offer.