How Knowing Changes Though Creating Art in a Collaborative Context

Proposal

Eric C. West

Columbia University, Teachers College

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the possibility of changing knowing through co-creation of art, the study also purposes to establish the use and role of portraiture to the field of social art. As such, the study will employ a qualitative model involving the use of project portraiture report, participants observation, and a semi-structured interview. The study will be based at Columbia University, Teachers College. The researcher will interview four persons with experience in using portraiture as a model. Thematic data analysis will be used to analyze the collected data.

The study endeavors to prove that portraiture method is versatile and effective for data collection due to the ability to connect with the participants through dialogues and communication. The researcher also hopes that the results will establish the possibility of changing knowing through co-creation or art.

Keywords: Co-created art, portraiture, transformative learning, adult learning

Executive Summary

Transformation and transformative learning through art is a common phenomenon supported by various findings from related studies. Nonetheless, the aspect(s) underlying these transformational and transformative experiences is still unclear, as there are insufficient explanations as to why this happens. Similarly, it is quite challenging to identify an individual or a population (demographic or group) that is likely to be subject to transformative learning through their everyday experiences and interactions with the arts, or the process of collaborative art making. In this regard, the purpose of the paper is to examine the possibility of using transformative learning as an adult educative experience through the collaborative creation of multiple pieces of art as was prototyped in my pilot study. Additionally, I will discuss the processes undertaken in selecting artists for collaborative art-making, and the construction of underlying knowledge creation from the process, based on psychological, cultural and social factors.

The pilot study showed that the concept of collaborating to create art is potentially useful in evoking reflection and critical thinking among individuals and groups, subsequently allowing participants to reflect on new meaning schemes. Furthermore, the concept of collaborative art also stands out as a useful tool for exploring the ability of an individual to deconstruct cultural hegemonies, especially by challenging various ideological values and perspectives entrenched in the co-constructed piece(s) of art. As a result, individuals that participated in the pilot seemed to be able to reconsider existing social norms that might be oppressive in a critical manner, in addition to evaluating the presenting laws and values within their social and communal context, thereby potentially enabling them to be drivers of change within their respective communities.

Table of Contents

Introduction 5

Content and Background 5

Problem Statement 5

Purpose of study 5

Approach 6

Research Questions 6

Design 6

Outcomes 6

Assumptions 6

The Researcher 6

Rationale and Significance 6

Definitions 6

Literature Review 7

Adult Learning Theory Introduction 7

Adult Learning Theories 8

Transformative Learning Theory 8

Social emancipatory perspective 12

Experiential Learning Theory 14

Socio-Cultural and Social Emancipatory Theory 16

Art and Adult Learning 18

Co-Creating Art and Transformative Learning 19

Transformative Learning and Art 19

Socio-Cultural Theory and Aesthetics 21

Critical Thinking 22

Neurophysiology Theory 23

Presentational Knowing Theory 23

Encoding/Decoding Theory 24

Summary 25

Conclusion 27

Methodology 29

Introduction 29

Information Needed & Sources of Data 29

Recap Research Questions 29

The Study Sample & From What Population They Will Be Drawn 29

What Criteria Will Be Used to Select the Sample 29

How Many Subjects 29

Plan and Method for Data Collection 29

Rationale 29

Piloting and How the Pilot Informs Current Thinking 29

Data Collection Sequence (Chart) 29

Methods 29

Plan and Methods of Analysis and Synthesis of Data 29

Matrices 29

Coding Schemes 29

The rationale for Methods Selection 29

Field Techniques 29

Triangulation 29

Verification and Confirmability 29

Assurance of Human Subject Protection 29

Limitation 29

Plans to Address Them 29

Timeline for Study 30

Projected Chapter Outline of Dissertation 30

References 31

Appendix 38

Consent forms 38

Interview Protocol 38

Instruments and Forms 38

Projected Coding Scheme 38

Projected Matrices 38

Introduction

Background

This paper aims to explore how knowledge creation changes through the collaborative creation of art. This paper bases its arguments on my pilot study that shows that collaborative art creation could promote meaningful learning. Various theorists present different definitions of “transformative learning’, albeit, the paper will adopt the description by Mezirow, who was the first to develop this concept of learning in 1978. Mezirow defined transformative learning as a theory of adult learning focused on the utilization of disorienting dilemmas to challenge the thinking of students, with intent on encouraging individuals to apply critical and creative thinking, questioning and reflection to contextualize the underlying assumptions and beliefs about the world. Accordingly, transformative learning entails the transformation of previously held beliefs, assumptions, and perspectives which enables an individual to expand his or her ways of knowing by transforming their habits of mind and worldview (Mezirow, 1978). The study assumption is that knowledge can be created collaboratively, and the effect of such creation could lead to effective transformation within individuals as far as adult education is concerned.

Purpose of the study

Knowledge creation is an integral part of the learning cycle. The current research is intended to shed light on how collaborative art creation could be used as a catalyst to create new ways of knowing in adults. I will seek to explore whether, through the process of collaboratively creating art, transformative learning can be achieved.

The Approach

Research Questions

Do ways of knowing change by creating art in a collaborative context?

What kind of learning occurs through the collaborative creation process?

Does the collaborative creation of art lead to transformative learning among participating adult artists?

Design

The use of co-created art to promote knowing is not a very well researched field, especially about Bermuda culture and artwork. This study, therefore, with the help of four professionals in the field of art and portraiture will endeavor to contribute to help bridge the knowledge gap that currently exists.

Procedure and Data Collection

In portraiture, the collection of data will include participants engagement informal interviews, preparation of field noted regarding the works of art by the participants like documents or artifacts. The researcher will also maintain a journal to reflect on the relevant processes and observations in the portraiture method. The process will commence with an and in-depth description of the physical environment, considering the furniture arrangement, art placement, and participants general workplace ambiance. Other items of consideration are the attire and appearance of the participants, facial expressions, use of gesture and facial expressions, as well as behaviors and mannerism. This rich information layer is fundamental for the study since the researcher would want to know the items that matter to the participants and put down his thoughts and feelings on the observed details in a journal as data collected.

Data Analysis

The study employed the listening guide method for data analysis; this model is appropriate for analysand data resulting from personal narratives (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Once the interviews are recorded, the researcher would listen and listen again to the records of the conversations. According to Gilligan & Brown (1990), this model is a pathway finder into relationships avoiding an interpretation based on a fixed framework. The model works well with portraiture methods as there is a possible venture into another person’s world and understands it profoundly making the listening guide the most appropriate tool for data analysis in this research.

The listening guide was broken down into the following aspects, as suggested by Gilligan et al. (2003). The first step is to commence the informal conversation with the participants; the second component was the listening for self by the researcher to help identify the I-statement to help the researcher create the I-poems. The third step involved the researcher listening for the contrapuntal voices; these included the opinions and views possessing counterpoints to each other; these were then followed by interpretation gathering by the researcher within the analyzed data.

The Researcher

Rationale and Significance

The researcher expects that the study will provide relevant insight from the participants of the study regarding their culture, epistemological, and ontological viewpoint and their perception of self. The result may be checked visa vee the white developmental studies and the Eurocentric perspectives for similarities of differences. The researcher thinks that there will be great similarities between the current study perceptions on the ethics of care and relationships with the western development concepts of the same (Wilson, 2008).

Additionally, the researcher expects data analysis and the subsequent interpretation and discussions to offer a contribution to the current literature regarding the Bermuda People’s heritage culture, social justice, rights, and adult learning and development. The study will also provide relevant information regarding the revolutionization of the Bermuda culture through critical consciousness, social policy changes, educational efforts, social justice in the swiftly changing society (Barnhardt, & Kawagely, 2012).

Definitions

Literature Review

Adult Learning Theory Introduction

Different schools of thought provide various divergent perspectives regarding the concept of the transformative adult in learning through the co-creation of art. These include Critical Theory perspectives developed from the Marxist view that is prevalent across Europe and South America like Habermas and Freire, the Western rationalist perspective like Mezirow with. Contributions from Dewey, all critical to the promotion of transformative learning concepts among adults. These scholars make their contributions by offering theoretical frameworks that add significant value to the notion of adult learning that is transformative.

Adult learning theory refers to the acquisition of knowing, experience, expertise, and understanding as an adult (Merriam, 2001). It also encompasses experiential learning, which is the process of learning through experiences, defined as the process of learning through reflection on actions (Kolb, 2014). According to Knowles (1978), adult learning theory entails the acquisition of knowing and skills in adulthood, primarily for achieving self-actualization. This form of learning is known as Andragogy, and it is different from Pedagogy, which is childhood learning.

Malcolm Knowles, first proposed Andragogy, or adult learning theory, in 1968, given that previous research had mainly concentrated on the concept of pedagogy or teaching children (Knowles, 1978). Knowles argued that there were significant differences in the ways that adults learn in comparison to how children learn. As such, the concept of andragogy operates out of the assumption that adult learning should provide specific learning curriculum tailored specifically to adults. For instance, Knowles argued that adults tend to be more internally motivated, self-directed, and ready to learn, as opposed to children, who in most cases have to be pushed to learn.

I would argue that andragogy can be enhanced through the integration of the arts, which focus on influencing the pleasurable sensory perceptions (aesthetics) among adults. Geller (2018) argues that this seems to be because adults tend to assign more meaning to what they observe compared to children. Regarding my study, such experiences among adults learning as collaborators might be useful in determining the degree to which their ways of knowing change as a result of their time together during the co-creation process. Brannon (2013) suggests that collaboration can enhance the outcomes of learning by presenting adults with different experiences and encounters to boost their knowing and understanding while interacting with pieces of art. Adults learning with art and each other seem to enable novice learners to acquire new knowing and skills as evidenced through both modelings as well as imitation of an individual or peer that is more skilled and capable. Through this process, an individual can gain new meaning and knowing through collaborative learning (Bandura 1986).

Adult Learning Theories

Transformative Learning Theory

Individual perspective transformation

Transformative learning theory was developed by Jack Mezirow and is useful for the description of how people acquire and use critical self-reflecting to consider their beliefs and experiences, and over time, change their dysfunctional ways of seeing the world. The transformation process is described as analytical and rational (Mezirow, 1991). Transformative learning theory was created with significant influence from Freire’s idea of conscientization, Habermas’ three-dimensional learning domains (practical, emancipatory, and technical aspects), and Kuhn’s approach of change which explains how adults reform to become creative (Freire, 1970; Mezirow, 1991; Kitchenham, 2008). Mezirow’s theory focuses heavily on personal perspective transformation rather than social transformation through critical reflection, taking up roles, action, and dialogue (Mezirow, 1991). Mezirow (2000) argues that transformative learning occurs in two broad ways; the first one is claimed to be sudden, epochal changes in the form of a disorienting dilemma, and the second is thought to be through incremental learning, where an individual learns continuously over a long period. Mezirow’s theory has evolved over the years to incorporate broader elements of transformative learning. According to Stone et al. (2017), this evolution has brought about new perspectives of measuring transformative learning in both individual and social domains.

Finally, Mezirow’s transformative learning theory originated from a constructivist paradigm, which holds that how learners interpret and reinterpret their experience are central to their meaning-making (Mezirow, 1991). He further divided the concept of transformative learning into two major categories of learning, which include communicative learning and instrumental learning. Mezirow defined instrumental learning as learning that occurs through task-oriented problem solving and the determination of the cause and effects relationships. On the other hand, Mezirow (2000) defined communicative learning as learning that involves how individuals tend to communicate their feelings, needs, and desires with one another. Some of the major components of transformative learning theory are meaning structures, which include meaning schemes and perspectives.

According to Mezirow (1991), meaning perspectives refer to a broad set of predispositions that result from the psycho-cultural assumptions that determine the horizons of individual and group expectations. He further divided these meaning perspectives into three separate sets of codes, including the epistemic codes, psychological codes, and socio-linguistic codes. Meaning schemes, on the other hand, refer to the constellation of feelings, judgment, beliefs, and concepts that shape a particular interpretation (Mezirow, 2000). Mezirow states that individuals usually develop and understand meaning structures through reflection, which involves a critique of assumptions to determine whether the belief, usually acquired through cultural assimilation in childhood, remains functional when an individual enters become adulthood (Mezirow, 1991). Reflection is similar to critical thinking, whereby individuals can reflect on the content or premise of the problem and go about creating strategies for problem-solving.

Mezirow also introduced four ways of learning, which include learning new meaning schemes, learning by elaborating or refining meaning schemes, transforming meaning perspectives. Transforming meaning schemes allows individuals to capture or gain new knowing and understanding of their lifeworld (Mezirow, 1991). Mezirow’s theory has since been elaborated upon by a group of other several scholars in the field, including Boyd (1991) and Cranton (1994). Additionally, transformative learning theory shares commonalities with several different theories of adult learning, including experiential learning by Dewey (1934), Kolb (2014), as well as andragogy by Knowles (1978).

Conversely, there are varying perspectives about the nature in which adult learn and the meaning of transformative learning. Some are not supportive of Mezirow’s top-down rational approach, such as Johnston (2010), who claims that horizontal information flow is instead the most effective technique for promoting transformative learning. According to Yorks et al. (2003), cultural dimensions such as masculinity, power-distance, and cohesiveness also have a significant effect on transformative learning and are not given enough attention to Mezirow’s theory.

John Dirkx (1998) also contributes considerably to the topic through his research on the core characteristics of transformative learning. Slightly pivoting from Mezirow version of transformative learning, Dirkx created an alternative theory of transformative pedagogy, which emphasizes the actualization of the individual and society, he added that social transformative learning focuses on the individual, society and the extrarational changes (Dirkx, Mezirow, & Cranton, 2006). In this view of transformative learning, an individual is asked to consider how to change the constraining socio-cultural influences that prevent their self-actualization through critique, dialogue, reflection, and creativity. The educator or facilitator, therefore, plays a central role in enhancing the process of change even with the adult co-creator being the initiator of the transferer of information. However, as it relates to the study, Dirkx is skeptical of the ability of aesthetic experiences to incite change in adults. The assertions by Dirkx are critical to this study due to the combination of the skills of the educator and the learner in achieving transformation. Consequently, my research will examine collaboratively created art to discern whether the process produces changes in the ways of knowing within participating subjects.

In terms of my study, Mezirow (1991) suggested that artistic pieces contain aesthetic elements that support the development of various viewpoints, be they ethical, social, or cultural dimensions. The Marxist ideologies also applied to this concept of transformative learning with arguments on the belief that the ingratiation of art, in reality, is based on three major dimensions that empower an individual with the ability to transform co-creation from an art piece into new knowing and understanding (Taylor and Cranton, 2012). These three dimensions include the form, as an individual expression of one’s social being, the ability to mirror social realities, and the potential for reflections on identity (Hioctour, Giannoukos & Stergiou, 2015). An analysis of Mezirow’s arguments on transformation learning provides that it builds on the consequence of aesthetic experiences, argued to be derived from the redefinition of social problems, whereby persisting meanings are insufficient in tackling the issues at hand.

Social emancipatory perspective

Although Meziorw drew from Freire to create his theory of transformative learning, Paulo Freire suggests that for transformation to occur, it must exist at both the individual and social levels. This idea of transformative learning is regarded as a 21st-century pedagogical learning tool (Enkhtur et al., 2017), though it dates back to the 1970s when Freire coined the concept in his seminal work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970). Freire changed the teacher-student relationship from the traditional teacher dominated pedagogical learning orientation to a new perspective in which both the learner and the teacher actively engage in the learning process so that learning takes place in both directions. Freire (1970), criticized mainstream education and suggested that it only served as a means of fostering social, economic, and political oppression on students rather than acting as a vehicle for liberating a student’s creative powers. Bourdieu (1970) agrees with Freire by asserting that mainstream education only produces learners with the abilities to gather knowledge and memorize instead of producing critical thinking that challenges current schools of thought and spurs innovation.

Similarly, Brookfield (1986) argues that to motivate adults in a formal learning exercise, there is the need to ensure the adults construct or find meaning to their lives as a critical motivating factor by the instructors. Brookfield suggests that many adults participating in formal learning experiences find themselves caught in between developmental phases in a situation where the structures of their old stage are irrelevant in solving current, more complex life issues. Brookfield argues that it should be a requirement for adult learners to construct new meaning structures in educational settings that are instrumental for developing new perceptions for understanding and changing the world. One of the examples that Brookfield uses is middle-aged adults, for instance, who do not find relevance anymore in what gave meaning to their lives as young adults, therefore a different kind of learning is required to replace old ways of meaning-making in favor of more appropriate techniques suitable and demanded by the life of the adult student. Adult learners, then, abandon old ways of meaning-making and adopt new ways of self-construction. Brookfield suggests that it is this shift that enables transformation with the aid of the sociocultural context of the educational experience (Brookfield, 1986).

In the Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970) Freire describes the current educational paradigm as that between the oppressed and the oppressor. He suggests that education should help liberate the oppressed from their condition and enable them to gain their sense of humanity. These individuals should, therefore, play a role attaining their freedom. On the other hand, the oppressors should also be able to rethink their strategies and understand their part in the oppression as this is the only way to attain true liberation. Freire also attacks the concept of perceiving learners as “empty accounts” that need to be filled by the teacher. This so-called “banking model of education” attempts to control the ability of learners to think and act. He argues that this affects their manner of adjustment a student makes to the world due to the inhibition of the learner’s creative power.

Freire’s work also paved the way for what is knowing understood as Critical Pedagogy. The author argued that dominant social relations imprint a negative, suppressed, and silenced self-image into learners who will only gain freedom by developing critical consciousness. According to Freire, conscientization, or consciousness-raising (Dirkx, 1998), referred to the development of crucial consciousness as a life-shaping process in which learners develop the ability to perform an analysis, question uncertainties and initiate self-action on cultural, economic, political as well as social contexts. He argued that problem-solving capabilities and the power of dialogue make it possible for learners to develop awareness about the oppression and inequality contributing to oppressive structures in society. Romano, Stollo, and Striano (2014), in their presentation of transformational learning, observed that interpersonal communication could be instrumental in changing a learner’s communication. The authors also believe that Freire’s methods and ideologies could be well used in the education of vulnerable members of the community like immigrants and refugees.

Experiential Learning Theory

According to Kolb and Kolb (2005), Experiential Learning (EL) is a type of education in which one gains new knowing and information through experience. Several other theorists have also added considerably to the EL field. These theorists include John Dewey, Jean Piaget, and Kurt Lewin. Kolb (2014) argued that every experience that an individual goes through exposes him or her to a new set of knowing, and expertise. As such, the theory is also defined as learning through the reflection in action. (Ishikawa and Montello, 2006).

The Experiential Learning Cycle (ELC)

In the ELC, Kolb reports that experience is acquired through the conceptualization of abstract and concrete experiences. On the other hand, the development of observations based on personal experiences and the use of ideologies in decision making and problem-solving acts as transforming experiences (Kolb, 1984; Kolb and Kolb, 2005). These four aspects, feeling, thinking, watching, and doing, are what he described the Experiential Learning Cycle, as demonstrated in figure 1. In the learning cycle, feeling supports thoughtful observation, which is assimilated into thinking, followed by active experimentation to create new experiences (Smith, 2001, 2010).

Concrete experience (feeling)

Reflective Observation (watching)

Active experimentation (doing/testing in new situations)

Abstract conceptualization (thinking)

Figure 1. The experimental learning cycle. It is adapted from An Interpretation of Dewey’s Experiential Learning Theory

One of the limitations of Kolb’s theory, however, is that he pays little attention to reflection (Boud et al., 1985). Dewey’s (1934) perspective on learning from experience; however, attempts to resolve the relationship between thought and experience. He perceived non-reflective learning experiences as habit-based and the dominant kind of experience. Dewey (1938) asserts that reflection on our experiences is necessary to solve problems that one faces in our habitual ways of action.

Dewey argues that for the learning process to take place, the traditional flow of experience should be interrupted. He suggests that this is necessary for reflection to occur that supports the learning process. Reflection on one’s experience is necessary to help draw meaning out of the experience, and the obtained meaning can, therefore, be applied to guide future action. He suggests that the reflective process is in many cases triggered by an unfamiliar situation or a difficult problem that makes a learner become “stuck” by the strangeness of something beyond the scope of a learner’s experience (Dewey, 1993). This argument is in alignment with Paulo Freire, who argued that deep learning could be achieved through intense direct experience. He referred to this a shock or “espanto.” The continuity of experience is a powerful truth of human existence, and this is central to the theory of learning. Habermas’ writings also support the notion of using reflection to generate knowledge. He says that a reflection is an important tool that is useful in the development of particular forms of knowledge, especially within the social sciences. He gives specific focus to on the nature of the various processes that underpin the different processes that are important for knowledge generation, and reflection is one of the most significant processes (Habermas, 1971).

Socio-Cultural and Social Emancipatory Theory

Socio-Cultural Theory

Soviet Psychology Lev Vygotsky first suggests socio-cultural theory in the late 1800 and early 1900s. The theory suggests that caregivers, peers, and the culture writ large were vital in the development of higher order functions. Vygotsky argued that learning has its basis in interacting with other people. Once the interaction has occurred, information is then integrated on the individual level. Critical analysis of Vygotsky’s (1971) theory of human development, however, suggests that some of the theorists used in this paper who ascribe to individual, rational change overlook some fundamental issues about adult transformation. Essentially, Vygotsky’s works focused on demystifying the concept of the socio-cultural influences that were inherent to both aesthetics and art. One of the critic groups that reviewed Vygotsky’s works were Wertsch and Tulviste (1992), who concluded that it was worth considering a wide range of social aspects of transformational learning.

According to Vygotsky (1971), the creation of art is not the sole prerogative of the artist, but instead incorporates social influences from within his or her surroundings, which are critical in informing the emotions explored in any particular piece of artwork. Vygotsky’s theory of aesthetics incorporates various elements including the social background of the artwork, the form of the artwork, the intention of the creator of the artwork, symbolism of the artwork, as well as the interpretation of the reader or audience of the artwork based on his or her level of experience.

Social-Emancipatory Theory

According to Wherland (2012), art remains a significant tool of communication used in initiating critical thinking that facilitates the achievement of transformative learning among adult learners. Shaw (2017) uses the Encoding / Decoding theory by Hall to address the methods used by an adult to observe art to attach meanings to each aesthetic experience. For starters, the message may be decoded in the implication that the artist intended during the encoding process, referred to as the preferred reading. However, in the case of oppositional reading, a new and unintended meaning is ascribed to a given piece of art. In the same regard, under negotiated interpretation, there is a balance struck between the intention of the artist and the oppositional meaning conveyed by the audience.

Drawing from the encoding/decoding model of Hall, other scholars named Zorrilla and Tisdell (2016) evaluated the concept of adult interpretation of art in both formal and informal settings, which in turn allows different people to share conflicting ideas that evoke critical appraisal of a work of art. As a result, this leads to the appropriate decoding of messages as intended by the artist. Social Emancipatory Theory is therefore, significant in the study as it complements the other schools of thought related to this field. For instance, through critical evaluation of socio-cultural factors, it is possible to understand what and how they influence both transformative and experiential learning. Furthermore, the thought process of decoding also justifies observing changes in the brains of individuals who view art, as suggested by the theory of neurophysiology.

Art and Adult Learning

Learning that is claimed to be transformational as a result of interacting with art is not necessarily a new concept. John Dewey (1934) first began suggesting that art can create effect beyond its place on the canvas in the early 1900s. At around the same time, Vygotsky, whose research was not translated into English until the 1960s, wrote extensively in the early 1900s about the Psychology of Art and Aesthetics (1971) and echoed Dewey’s sentiments. More recently, Pelowski et al. (2017) have confirmed this existence of cognitive transformation while viewing art through the use of fMRI technology by reviewing the psychological perspectives involved with the use of art and adult interaction. In this case, the scholars argue that the emotional reactions that adults have towards art are what initiate the premise of transformative learning. However, the scholars did not discuss the role played by any co-created art in facilitating psychological change among adults (Pelowski et al., 2016). The arguments of the researchers related to the psychological perspectives affecting the learning experiences of adults and were based primarily on the concept that each piece of an artwork evokes a wide range of emotions among adults. It was these emotions that define the scope of learning that the adults experience when interacting with art that was freely available in museum settings.

Co-Creating Art and Transformative Learning

Mantas and Schwind (2014) argue that taking part in co-creative art-making processes can lead to more holistic, transformative learning. They argue that images and stories that are thrust upon us by others, rather than growing naturally from the soil of our own experience, have little potential to expand our consciousness or lead to transformation. Instead, they cause a kind of imaginative constriction that maintains its hold over time. The authors suggest that tacit knowing, knowledge not reachable by words, extends beyond individual human borders. On the other hand, Mantas and Miezitis (2014), argue that shared art-making is the expression of, the vehicle for, and the stimulus to human relationship. The authors argue that to choose to facilitate and participate in a co-creative art-making experience, really speaks to a commitment to the techniques and processes of meaning-making, co-inquiry, relational educational practices, and to an artistic living pedagogy that is always kept open to new encounters and change.

Transformative Learning and Art

Transformative learning theory, as proposed by Mezirow, provides a clear analysis on the concept of adult learning theory, whereby people of an adult age tend to learn by picking up new things from their everyday environment (Mezirow, 1991). Unlike child learners, adult learners usually possess an internal desire to acquire new knowledge and expand their existing understanding of things, conditions, and activities around them (Kellogg, 2017). In this regard, adult learning provides adults with an effective way to acquire new knowledge without necessarily attending traditional learning centers like going to classrooms. Also, transformative learning among adults through the co-creation of art might also occur when adults reflect on their respective daily realities (King, 2002). In most cases, the skills that adults learn from is usually a reflection of their society, such as one mirroring the dreams and feelings of its people as embedded in the local culture of a community and its people (Knowles, 1978). In other cases, the creation of art can be out of pure fantasy, primarily out of the creative and imaginative mind of the art creator.

Kokkos (2010) is one of the scholars that support the above findings regarding the linkage of transformative learning and art. The scholar argued that adults could learn through collaboration in art, taking advantage of the aesthetic nature of the medium to facilitate transformative learning in students. He also noted that the nature of an encounter between art and an individual was instrumental in triggering his or her learning experience from art. In terms of interacting with art, he suggested that encounters could be through education, self-inquiry, or meeting with the artist. Kokkos (2010) believed that such an encounter enabled an individual to identify specific elements in a piece of art to find new meanings and values about the piece. As such, Kokkos argued that this interaction could facilitate transformative learning in an individual by shaping his or her assumptions regarding their existing views.

Furthermore, Kokkos (2010) advises against viewing art in isolation, as he believes that it does not create the optimal environment conducive to learning. He argues that it denies the learner inherent social ideologies that facilitate personal viewing of a piece of art that can improve the interpretive frameworks that one might derive from interacting with art. In this regard, it would be advisable to consider the socio-cultural perspectives of art viewers when in this scenario.

Geller (2018), while reviewing the relationship between transformative adult learning and art, highlighted the existence of an interdependent relationship between the concept of psychology and art. Geller argues that it is possible for aesthetic experiences developed through interaction to be used in the field of psychotherapy, which in turn leads to the successful induction of positive change within adult learners (2018). However, according to Miles (2016), co-creating art might not have the transformative learning capabilities that adult learners may be looking out for to gain knowledge and understanding. As discussed above, the relationship between art, politics, and aesthetics only changes the consciousness of individuals, who might not necessarily have the authority or the right tools at hand to transform the issues embedded within their respective societies. Miles (2016) concludes his theoretical framework with the assertion that the world is ‘unreal’ as depicted in the art given the fact that its focus is an examination of inverted ideas, subsequently casting doubt on its degree of truthfulness. From this perspective, Miles argues that art has the power to evoke and enhance the level of consciousness among members of the community but also has the power to make others feel marginalized. Dewey (1934) has another perception regarding the use of co-creating art in adult learning. He argues that the concept of transformative learning should be explained from the perspective of how knowing ought to be where the aesthetic experience takes center stage of the learning process. Dewey (1934) reviewed responses from poetic communication and writings used in various learning. In his analysis, Dewey stated that aesthetics had a critical role in determining the impact of transformative among adult learners.

Socio-Cultural Theory and Aesthetics

According to John-Steiner and Mahn (1996), Vygotskian Sociocultural approaches emphasizes the interdependence existing between individual and social processes in the co-creation of knowledge. Lantolf (2000) argues that Vygotsky, in his study identified the role of “tools” in the process of learning. He argued that human action is not primarily influenced by the physical world without these intermediary tools which comprise of the human-created artifacts that stores a people’s culture. These cultural elements play a critical role in aiding the problem-solving process without which the problem cannot be solved similarly. These tools are subject to modification resulting from generational, cultural changes. According to Vygotsky (1978 cited Lantolf 2000), the socio-cultural approach allows the learner to transform the learned aspects through interaction into personal values.

Social-cultural theory, therefore, concerns with the presentation of the whole complexity of the learning process rather than the isolative presentation of knowledge and skill. The theory opposes the isolative teaching of skills and advocates for the fact that meaning should be at the center stage of any meaningful unit of study. While citing Vygotsky Shayer (2002) argues that the learning process awakens the internal processes of development within a learner that can only be able to operate when the learner is in interaction with other people in his or her environment including the learner’s peers as well as the teacher. In the event the processes get initialized, they form part of the learner’s independent achievements from the learning process. Therefore, according to this theory, the learning process, both instructions and development are important factors during knowledge acquisition. These factors interact in a very compels association where the instructions play a critical role in the development process.

Critical Thinking

Raikou (2015) argues that critical thinking is crucial for transformative learning since it entails open-mindedness, openness to divergent views and self-evaluation, all of which promote transformation. The author, therefore, advocates for teamwork in educational institutions, to foster transformative learning. In the co-creation of art, it could be possible that change can be achieved through collaborative efforts between multiple artists or stakeholders. As such, the impact of co-creation through aesthetic experiences on transformative learning in adults will be studied.

Neurophysiology Theory

Using neurophysiology, Pelowski et al. (2017) advanced various theoretical frameworks in support of transformative learning. Pelowski focused on establishing the reactions occurring in the brain when observing a particular piece of art. In this regard, the researchers found that the brain registered cognitive changes when viewing art according to their fMRI models. The reason for this assertion is because the concept of neurophysiology incorporates various theories within the discourse, including adult learning theory, transformative learning theory, experiential learning theory, which explains the rationale behind the ability of artworks to cause specific changes in the brains of individuals (Pelowski et al., 2018). Furthermore, the scholar argues that the recognition of these simulations in mind is an indication of how reflection on processes based on social knowing is critical in influencing a person to change based on previous experiences of interacting with novelty (the work of art), as well as to create a new way of understanding a past encounter.

Presentational Knowing Theory

Presentational Knowing Theory is a theoretical framework related to art and learning developed by John Heron (1992). The theory defines presentational knowing as the ways through which individuals can know or get around to understanding new knowing and information in a manner that is intuitive, imaginable and manifested in the movement, sound color or shape of a given medium (Nzembayie, Buckley, & Cooney, 2019). Heron argues that individuals get access to presentational knowing through expressive forms such as music, dance, mime, visual, or dramatic arts, story, and metaphor, among others. Presentational knowing assists individuals to transform their tactic knowing and emotional experience into concepts and principles that become the foundation for new behaviors. Therefore, between individuals and groups, presentational knowing creates an empathic space that assists people with diverse lived experiences understand and learn from one another (Allen et al., 2019). Therefore, educators who understand these epistemological bridges are thought to be able to practice a more holistic pedagogy geared towards promoting the possibilities of transformation.

Encoding/Decoding Theory

Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding theory suggests that viewers of art derive their meaning from a piece of work which is separate from the producer’s intention and is socially constructed. According to Hall (1980), both the viewer and the producer have specific roles in the Encoding/Decoding relationship. Hall defines encoding as the process through which a producer constructs a form of media with a social intention while decoding refers to the process through which active audience members (decoders) receive, comprehend, and interpret the producer’s encoded media. Additionally, a decoder will understand media through a socially constructed lens that is unique to each’s life history and experience.

Hall hypothesized a four-step communication approach comprising of production, circulation, distribution or consumption, and reproduction stages (Hall, 1980). In media production, the construction (Encoding) of the message is provided, framed by ideas drawn from the target society’s dominant ideologies. Media content production is followed by distribution/circulation in which the media content is transmitted. The third stage is the consumption of the message by the audience (Decoding) that requires an active audience for meaningful discourse (interpretation). In reproduction, which is the last stage, an engaged audience is thought to interpret, decode meanings, and reconcile the complex emotional, cognitive, perceptual, and ideological outcomes of experiencing the media. Each stage plays a critical role in the discursive interaction and influences the next step while each viewer remains autonomous (Hall, 1980).

Lastly, Hall suggests that in the encoding and decoding process, media texts are consumed in three significant ways. The first is through a dominant process where the consumer interprets the media directly as it was encoded. The second is through an oppositional reading of the media, in which the audience reads the text but ultimately rejects the message contained in and receives the opposite of the encoded message (Allen, 2019). The third is through negotiated reading, where the audience interprets the media in their unique way by acknowledging the dominant content, accepting what they prefer while modifying it to reflect personal preferences and experiences (Hall, 1980).

Summary

The purpose of this paper was to explore the literature and provide a conceptual and theoretical basis from which to study how knowing changing through collaboratively creating art. Additionally, when combining the findings of my pilot study and the literature contained in this paper, it suggests that the co-creation of art might be a viable way of facilitating transformative adult learning.

This paper reviewed various scholars and their respective contributions to the utilization of art in the learning experiences of adults. Vygotsky (1971) and Dewey (1934) were among the first scholars to suggest that interaction with art had some transformative effects among audiences, thereby giving credibility to the argument that transformative learning might take place through co-creating art. In the same regard, Pelowski et al. (2017; 2018) further supported these arguments through their neurophysiology studies where the scholars reported that the brain underwent certain transformations when an individual perceived or interacted with a painting.

Encoding and decoding theory also supports the premise of transformative learning through co-creating art, by stipulating the different means through which individuals tend to interpret what they see from artworks. In this regard, the theory proposed three broad categories of encoding and decoding which act as a reference as to how audiences view a particular piece of art, thereby determining what kind of learning or knowing an individual derives from interacting with art notwithstanding the provisions of the experiential learning theory. The theory states that individuals learn through experiences that they encounter daily, including seeing, watching, or co-creating art, and thereby facilitating the co-creation of art.

Current research on the topic is quite informative in terms of conceptualizing the approach taken towards this study on using co-creative arts to promoting transformative adult learning. Each scholar reviewed in the study supports the notion that co-creating art and transformative learning share a significant bond in terms of the promotion of positive learning experience among adults. One of these scholars that makes substantial contributions to the concept of transformative learning is Pelowski et al. (2017). According to Pelowski, the FMRI models of the past did not dig deep enough to consider the affective dimensions of cognitive changes that occurred when individuals were consuming pieces of art. Prior research on the topic suggests a bias towards rational ways of viewing art and its impact on learning outcomes, which seems indicative of the Western culture. In fact, during the early 1920s, Vygotsky, a Soviet-era psychologist, made public his contributions towards the social transformational dimensions of art, as though they were implicit to the field (Vygotsky, 1971). In this regard, the VIMPAP model designed by Pelowski of European heritage helps add some insight as to why neurophysiologists consider perceiving artworks from different perspectives in Vienna (Pelowski et al., 2017). As such, the approach used by these scholars is more relevant to my study because they apply a top down and bottom up approach in their analysis of art, whereas previous models used only top-down models.

Raikou (2015) also adds a significant contribution to the concept of transformative learning with the use of art pieces through co-creation. In this case, the scholar argues that critical thinking occupies a central position in the idea of transformative learning, mainly because it entails open-mindedness, openness to divergent views, and self-evaluation. All three factors are critical in facilitating transformation in an individual. In the same regard, Raikou (2015) further notes that teamwork in educational institutions is effective in promoting transformative learning among students. The scholar also notes that in the co-creation of art, it is possible to achieve change through constructing collaborative efforts between multiple stakeholders and artists. As a result, the impact of co-creation through aesthetic experiences on transformative adult learning becomes something worth studying. Additionally, the paper, therefore, concludes that the collaborative creation of art can work to enhance transformative learning in the process of adult education.

Conclusion

This paper purposed to explore how knowledge creation changes through the collaborative creation of art, basing its arguments on a pilot study that shows that collaborative art creation could promote significant learning. The study, therefore, sought to investigate the various arguments presented by theorists regarding transformative learning. For instance, the Mezirow concept of learning of 1978 depicted transformative learning as a theory of adult learning focused on the utilization of disorienting dilemmas to challenge the thinking of students, with a particular intent on encouraging individuals to apply critical and creative thinking, questioning and reflection to contextualize the underlying assumptions and beliefs about the world. This would be the way to enables an individual to expand his or her ways of knowing by transforming their habits of mind and world view. Through the theories of learning, the study has proved that knowing can transform or change through art creation. The study has also revealed that when art in created collaboratively, the process of transformational learning is achievable. The study, therefore, concludes that the collaborative art creation would work in favor to enhance transformative learning in the process of adult education, it will be, and therefore it should be adopted for adult education.

CHAPTER THREE

Introduction

This in-depth qualitative portraiture study was to investigate how knowing changes though creating art in a collaborative context. The researcher chose a qualitative study due to its applicability to the study questions giving a more in-depth and subjective approach. The subjectivity and perspective were further enhanced by the adoption of portraiture. The study, therefore, addressed the following three questions (1) Do ways of knowing change by creating art in a collaborative context? (2) What kind of learning occurs through a collaborative creation process? (3) Does the collaborative creation of art lead to transformative learning among participating adult artists? This section will provide a discussion of the efficacy of portraiture as a methodological strategy to facilitate the investigation of the above study questions. Additionally, the study will present methods of finding research participants, data collection, and data analysis for study cohesion.

Context of the Study

The study took place in the local context of Bermuda in the North Atlantic. Owing to the lack of research studies on the collaborative creation of art and the local culture of conformity and there aren’t many places to try on or critically evaluate existing (colonial, oppressive, segregated, exclusive) social systems/structures and dynamics. The study would, therefore, provide a platform to encourage such future endeavors to express this aspect of culture using collaboratively created art. It will also provide suitable insight for helping individuals/adults explore these cultural issues and broaden their belief systems/perspectives.

Participants recruitment criteria

The researcher selected five professors John, Samantha, Charlie, Oliver, and Amelia as the participants of the study using convenience sampling technique. The selection was of this purposeful sample was based on their interests in the purposed research. Even though some researches argue that convenient sampling is not appropriate (SITE), (SITE) argue that in a qualitative model, all sampling is on purpose. (SITE) Explain that convenient sampling is a non-random sampling technique that involves the selection of predetermined study participants for the study depending on them meeting specific practical criteria including availability at a time, the willingness to volunteer geographical location, easy accessibility. The study used the named criteria to select the study population.

The study employed a recruitment email (See appendix 1) that was sent to all Art lecturing Professors at the university where I am taking my major, and I have been working as a university supervisor. The researcher received several responses from the professors; three of which were former mentor professors who had worked with the researcher, the researcher’s current professor also decided to be part of the study after being provided with a brief f the purpose of the study. These participants will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. However, it’s important to point out the fact that the participants were endowed with experience at different levels in the field of art. The participant’s information in tabulated as follows (See table 1)

Table 1: Professors’ department information

John

Samantha

Charlie

Amelia

Oliver

University

Year

Gender

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Race

White

Black

White

Black

Years of Lecturing

Data Collection

The researcher applied data triangulation to satisfy the need for reliable results. The researcher gathered data from project portraiture report, the observation by participants, and from the semi-structured interview conducted. According to Eskola & Suoranta (2000), the participant’s observation data collection model involves the interaction between the researcher and the participants on subject terms. The researcher partook participants observation while working at the university by interacting with professors teaching art as a subject. The researcher kept a diary of the internship as well as the report which formed part of the study. The study, therefore, includes the researcher’s experiences, the observation by participants, and informal interviews.

Portraiture model requires that data collection commences with a vivid and in-depth description of the physical environment, considering the furniture arrangement, art placement, and participants general workplace ambiance. Other items of consideration are the attire and appearance of the participants, facial expressions, use of gesture and facial expressions, as well as behaviors and mannerism. This rich information layer is fundamental for the study since the researcher would want to know the items that matter to the participants and put down his thoughts and feelings on the observed details in a journal as data collected.

Basing on the ideas by Gilligan, Spencer, Weinberg, and Bertsch (2003) in regard to the use of informal conversations, the researcher conducted at least two informal conversation with the participants, these were however not based on any predetermined questions but the participants willfully chose the topic of their discussion and they proceeded to talk about it. These conversations were, therefore, at the behest and the interest of the participants and consequently considered open-ended. The informal conversations then gave rise to more inclusive and broader interview questions which were considered more responsive to the participants.

Ethical consideration

The researcher involved the input of the institutional review board (IRB) in helping establish whether the data collection from human participants was performed ethically. Even though the researcher admits delays during the approval process, in the end, approval was made by the IRB. The study additionally chose to protest the participant’s identity, their departments of operations, and districts by the application of pseudonyms. The researcher also made an assurance to all the participants the lack of any harm as a result of involvement in the study which was followed by the signing of a consent fee assent form for student below age 18 (See Appendix D)

Data analysis.

Credibility.

The researcher will address issues of reliability, validity, and rigor in the following ways. The study will address the research rigor by a combination of interview, gathered empirical data from artifacts, interview, and observation, along with the artistic representation. The credibility and authenticity of the study were ensured through the soliciting input continuously inclusion of feedback on drafts as well as confirming the construed meaning of the participants in the researcher’s presentation (Wilson, 2008). This method of continuous listening to the participants is performed through checking and rechecking. The researcher, in many cases, attended to his inner feeling for any changes in opinion or adjustments in feeling. These two methods combined were instrumental in keeping into check the credibility of the study (Castellano, 2010; Flyvjberg, 2001).

Study Timelines

Target Date

ITEM

Jan -2019

Feb-2019

Mar-2019

April-2019

May-1019

Jun-2019

Jul-2019

Aug-2019

Topic Selection

Information gathering

Organization of Ideas

Creation of an outline and Thesis statement

Narrowing down sources and Written notes

Paper Drafting

Editing

Submission

References

Allen, J., Rumbold, J., Schnaedelbach, V., Woodford, A., & Tann, L. (2019). An image-led dialogue between creative arts educators and practitioners in Melbourne, Australia. Art Therapy in Australia: Taking a Postcolonial, Aesthetic Turn, 43.

Allen, K. (2019). “Do you want to help them,” Analyzing the representation of African Americans in Expressen’s news reports of 53 youths from Chicago visiting Stockholm in 1966.

Bandura, A., (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Boud, D., Keogh, R., and Walker, D. (1985) Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Nichols Publishing Company.

Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C., (1970). Society and culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Boyd, R., (1991). Personal transformation in small groups. London, Routledge.

Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Castellano, M. B., & Reading, J., (2010). Policy writing as dialogue: drafting an aboriginal chapter for Canada’s Tri-council policy statement: ethical conduct for research involving humans. International Indigenous Policy Journal, 1(2).

Dewey, J., 1933. How we think. New York: Heath & Co.

Dewey, J., (1934). Art as experience. New York: Minton, Balch & Company.

Dewey, J., (1938). Education and experience. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Dirkx, J. M. (1998). Transformative learning theory in the practice of adult education: An overview. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 7, 1-14.

Dirkx, J. M., Mezirow, J., & Cranton, P. (2006). Musings and reflections on the meaning, context, and process of transformative learning: A dialogue between John M. Dirkx and Jack Mezirow. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(2), 123-139.

Enkhtur, Ariunaa & Yamamoto, Beverley. (2017). Transformative Learning Theory and its application in higher education settings: A review paper. Journal of Osaka University, Human Science, 43, 193 -214.

Eskola, J. & Suoranta, J. 2000. Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen. Tampere: Vastapaino.

Fredman, S., (2015). Form and experience: Williams, Dewey, and the origins of American postmodernism. William Carlos Williams Review, 32(1-2), 33-52.

Freire, P., (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed, trans. Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: Continuum.

Flyvbjerg, B., (2001). Making social science matter. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.

Geller, J. D. (2018). Introduction: The transformative powers of aesthetic experiences in psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(2), 200-207.

Gilligan, C., Brown, L. & Rogers, A. (1990). Psyche embedded: A place for body, relationships, and culture in personality theory. In A. I. Rabin, R. A. Zucker, R. A. Emmons, & S.

Frank, (Eds.), Studying persons and lives. (pp. 86-145). New York, NY: Springer.

Gilligan, C., Spencer, R., Weinberg, M. K., Bertsch, T. (2003). On the listening guide: A voice-centered relational method. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes & L. Yardley. (Eds.), Qualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodological Design.

(pp. 157-172). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Grierson, E. M., (2017). Re-imagining learning through art as experience: An aesthetic approach to education for life. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(13), 1246-1256.

Hall, S., (1980). Encoding/decoding. Culture, media, language, 128-138. Retrieved from http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~jdslack/readings/CSReadings/Hall_Encoding-n-Decoding.pdf

Hector, V., Giannoukos, G., & Stergiou, I. (2015). Teaching the relationship between man and nature in environmental literacy with the help of transformative learning through art in adult education. Educational Quest: An International Journal of Education and Applied Social Sciences, 6(3), 183.

Habermas, Jürgen. (1971). “Knowledge and human interests, trans.” J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press, 310.

Ishikawa, T., & Montello, D. R., (2006). Spatial knowing from direct experience in the environment: Individual differences in the development of metric knowing and the integration of separately learned places. Cognitive Psychology, 52(2), 93-129

John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H., (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educational psychologist, 31(3-4), 191-206.

JOHNSON, K., & BELL, L., (2016). DARLENE E. CLOVER, KATHY SANFORD. Adult Education, Museums, and Art Galleries: Animating Social, Cultural, and Institutional Change.

Johnson, M., (2010). Contemporary theories of learning–Edited by Knud Illeris. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), E113-E114.

Kasl, E. S., & Yorks, L. (2016). How can we know each other when we are so different? Untangling the complexity of diverse life experience and interconnection—a model for navigating the paradox of diversity to create empathic learning space. Abingdon: Routledge.

Kellogg, D. (2017). The ‘D’is for development: Beyond pedagogical interpretations of Vygotsky’s ZPD. Applied Linguistics, 39(2), 241-246.

King, K. P., (2002). A Journey of Transformation: A Model of Educators’ Learning Experiences in Educational Technology. Abingdon: Routledge.

Kitchenham, A., (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104-123.

Knowles, M. S. (1978). Andragogy: Adult learning theory in perspective. Community College Review, 5(3), 9-20.

to, A. (2010). Transformative learning through aesthetic experience: Towards a comprehensive method. Journal of Transformative Education, 8(3), 155-177.

Kolb. D. A. & Fry, R. (1975). Towards an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Group Process. London: John Wiley

Kolb, D., (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212.

Kolb, D. A., (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press.

Lantolf, J.P., 2000. Introducing sociocultural theory. In: Lantolf, J. P., ed. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford University Press, 1-26

Mantas, K., & Miezitis, S. (2014) Mermaid (A/Be) musings from/on/into/ through the in-between. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 14(6), 574 – 588

Mantas, K., & Schwind, J. K. (2014). Fostering transformative learning through creative art-making processes and emerging artful forms two educators reflect on and dialogue about a shared arts-based workshop experience. Journal Transform Education, 12(1), 74–94.

Mastandrea, S., Bartoli, G., & Bove, G. (2007). Learning through the ancient art and experiencing emotions with contemporary art: Comparing visits in two different museums. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 25, 173–191.

Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. Merriam, S. B. (Ed.), The New Update on Adult Learning Theory: New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. (Pp.1-13)

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, J., (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Miles, M., (2016). Eco-aesthetic dimensions: Herbert Marcuse, ecology, and art. Cogent Arts & Humanities,3 (1), 1160640.

Nzembayie, K. F., Buckley, A. P., & Cooney, T. (2019). Researching pure digital entrepreneurship–a multimethod insider action research approach. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 11.

Ortiz-Hinojosa, S., (2018). Stock, Kathleen. Only Imagine. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 76(3), 353-356.

Pelowski, M., Markey, P. S., Forster, M., Gerger, G., & Leder, H. (2017). Move me, astonish me, delight my eyes and brain: The Vienna integrated model of top-down and bottom-up processes in art perception (VIMAP) and corresponding affective, evaluative, and neurophysiological correlates. Physics of Life Reviews, 21, 80-125.

Pelowski, M., Markey, P. S., Lauring, J. O., & Leder, H. (2016). Visualizing the impact of art: An update and comparison of current psychological models of art experience. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 160.

Raikou, N., (2016). Development of critical thinking through aesthetic experience: The case of students of an educational department. Journal of Transformative Education, 14(1), 53-70.

Roberts, T.G., (2003). An interpretation of Dewey’s Experiential Learning Theory. Retrieved from ERIC.

Rodman, G. B. (2019). The world we want: What we can still learn from Stuart Hall. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(1), 115-121.

Romano, A. (2018). Transformative learning: A review of the assessment tools. Journal of Transformative Learning, 5(1).

Romano, A., Strollo, M. R., & Striano, M. (2014). The theatre of the oppressed to promote transformative learning in a social-situated dialogue. The Role, Nature, and Difficulties of Dialogue in Transformative Learning, 220.

Shayer, M., 2002. Not just Piaget, not just Vygotsky, and certainly not Vygotsky as an alternative to Piaget. In: Shayer, M., ed. Learning intelligence, cognitive acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years. UK: Open University Press

Smagorinsky, P., (2011). Vygotsky’s stage theory: The psychology of art and the actor under the direction of perezhivanie. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 18 (4), 319-341.

Smith, M. K. (2001, 2010). ‘David A. Kolb on experiential learning’, the encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/david-a-kolb-on-experiential-learning/

Stone, G. A., Duerden, M. D., Duffy, L. N., Hill, B. J., & Witesman, E. M. (2017). Measurement of transformative learning in study abroad: An application of the learning activities survey. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 21, 23-32.

Stuckey, H. L., Taylor, E. W., & Cranton, P. (2013). Developing a survey of transformative learning outcomes and processes based on theoretical principles. Journal of Transformative Education, 11(4), 211-228.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.

Taylor, E. W., & Cranton, P., (2012). The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Tyler, J. A., (2015). From spoke to hub transforming organizational vision and strategy with the story and visual art. Adult Education Quarterly, 65, 326–342.

Vittoria, P., Strollo, M. R., Brock, S., & Romano, A. (2014). Surveys as praxis: A pilot study on Transformative Learning assessment with the Laboratory Experience of the Theatre of the Oppressed. In L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez, & I. Candel Torres (Eds.), INTED 2014 Proceedings: 8th International Technology, Education, and Development Conference (pp. 6147-6157). Valencia, Spain: IATED Academy.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1971). The psychology of art (ScriptaTechnica, Inc., Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1925)

Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Halifax, NS: Fernwood Publishing.

Appendices

Appendix1: Letter of Informed Consent

Investigator

[Name]

[Email:]

[Address]

[Mobile].

Senior Advisor:

[NAME], [UNIVERSITY]

[Email:]

[TITLE]

[Name]

[Email:]

[Name]

[Email:]

[Physical address:]

Please read this letter carefully. If you are interested in participating in this study, please feel free

to contact the researcher before the beginning of the study if you have any questions.

Dear Participant,

You are being invited to participate in a dissertation research project. The title of the study is How Knowing Changes Though Creating Art in a Collaborative Context: Stories of Resilience. The research question is, “What can be learned from listening to unheard, missing voices of four art professor about their experiences becoming lecturers and community leaders. The study involves creating a portrait with words. It is an in-depth life history with aesthetic elements, which the researcher and participants create together.

In this study, I am attempting to compose a narrative of educator’s lives, which includes social,

historical, cultural, and political contexts. I am seeking to learn from participants what their

experience was in becoming educators, what their experience practicing their craft as art lectures are, and how they arrived at where they are now as educators and leaders in their communities. I will use pseudonyms for individuals, places, and institutions if participants wish to remain

anonymous.

Methods: Portraiture methods involve semi-structured interviews and observations of

participants. Interviews and observations are held at the participant’s convenience. Observations

are not evaluative. Participants can choose to use their names or remain anonymous. Participants

PORTRAITS OF THREE SUCCESSFUL BERMUDA NATIVE EDUCATORS

may choose to use a pseudonym. Other persons who are observed will be unnamed and the

places and settings where observations occur will be unnamed and unidentified.

The observations and interviews will take place from October to December 2019. The three

interviews will take place in a location chosen by the participant(s). The researcher will provide

lists of questions before hand. The interviews are digitally recorded and transcribed. The

transcriptions will be coded and analyzed to find themes. The transcripts will be emailed to the

participant(s) to check the accuracy, and the meaning of what has been

transcribed.

Participation in interviews is voluntary, and you can answer only those questions you comfortable

discussing. The information that is shared will be held in strict confidence and discussed only

with the research team.

Benefits:

By participating in this study, you are producing knowledge and contributing to the field of adult

Learning. The voices of Alaska Native and indigenous people are missing from the education

research, thus your voice will be adding to the knowledge Alaska Native education and adult

development.

Risks:

There are minimal risks that information obtained in doing research with participants from other

cultures will be misused or misinterpreted. The ownership of indigenous knowledge must be

established and protected through consent and if necessary, the consent for the participation of

elders and community members as the research proceeds. The researcher will take all necessary

precautions to ensure that you are informed at every step about the nature of the study and you

will have access and support from the researcher at any time. Your confidentiality will be

protected and this letter is to clarify the clear intention of the researcher to protect your personal

and professional confidentiality. You will have access to all the written documents contained in

the dissertation.

How data will be stored and protected

The data will be stored in a locked cabinet by [NAME] and will be destroyed when the

study is completed.

Right to withdraw

Your participation in this study is voluntary. You have the right to withdraw from the study at

any time and for any reason. If you withdraw at any time, all the data you have contributed will

be deleted and destroyed.

By signing this letter, you are giving your consent to participate:

Your name: __________________ Date: _________________________

Appendix2: Interview Protocol

Appendix3: Instruments and Forms

Appendix4: Projected Coding Scheme

Appendix5: Projected Matrices