'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active'

Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

Abstract

Where research active academics are also creative practitioners, the relationship
between the notions of 'practice active' and 'research active' is often vexed.
Many academics, and academic institutions, would maintain that creative works
do not in themselves constitute serious research, or make an explicit contribution to the generation of new knowledge. However, artist-academics have for some years contended that their creative work deserves recognition in research terms. As a result in Australia there has been an argument that creative works should be accorded 'research equivalence', thus granting creative works made by academics a status that universities are able to incorporate into their research reporting structures. Yet many academics continue to maintain that creative works are generated by a different kind of impulse than that which motivates researchers; that research papers and creative artifacts are different kinds of things; and that, in any case, even creative artists frequently do not identify their creative outputs as constituting a form of research. This view is as prevalent in the field of creative writing as it is in other creative fields. This paper offers a reflection on issues raised by poets about the relationship between research and their creative works in interviews we have conducted over recent years. It asks whether we need to deconstruct the current research paradigm that dominates universities and think more laterally about what
constitutes new knowledge-and it also asks what kind of knowledge that might
be. It questions whether the research value of many artworks lies not so much in
their explicit addressing of any research question or problem, but in the ways in
which such works raise issues that throw light on our relationships to the world,
language, and the ineffable.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationOld and New, tried and Untried
Subtitle of host publicationCreativity and Research in the 21st Century
EditorsJeri Kroll, Andrew Melrose, Jen Webb
Place of PublicationChampaign, USA
PublisherCommon Ground Publishing
Chapter1
Pages1-20
Number of pages20
ISBN (Print)9781612298405
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Creative Work
Creative Arts
Imagining
Artist
Equivalence
Language
Artifact
Artwork
Research Paradigms
Poet
Creative Writing
Research Paper
Impulse
Creative Artists

Cite this

WEBB, J., & HETHERINGTON, P. (2016). 'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active': Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector. In J. Kroll, A. Melrose, & J. Webb (Eds.), Old and New, tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century (pp. 1-20). Champaign, USA: Common Ground Publishing.
WEBB, Jen ; HETHERINGTON, Paul. / 'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active' : Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector. Old and New, tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century. editor / Jeri Kroll ; Andrew Melrose ; Jen Webb. Champaign, USA : Common Ground Publishing, 2016. pp. 1-20
@inbook{14cb9757ec164149b6d5de0aa32baeab,
title = "'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active': Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector",
abstract = "Where research active academics are also creative practitioners, the relationshipbetween the notions of 'practice active' and 'research active' is often vexed.Many academics, and academic institutions, would maintain that creative worksdo not in themselves constitute serious research, or make an explicit contribution to the generation of new knowledge. However, artist-academics have for some years contended that their creative work deserves recognition in research terms. As a result in Australia there has been an argument that creative works should be accorded 'research equivalence', thus granting creative works made by academics a status that universities are able to incorporate into their research reporting structures. Yet many academics continue to maintain that creative works are generated by a different kind of impulse than that which motivates researchers; that research papers and creative artifacts are different kinds of things; and that, in any case, even creative artists frequently do not identify their creative outputs as constituting a form of research. This view is as prevalent in the field of creative writing as it is in other creative fields. This paper offers a reflection on issues raised by poets about the relationship between research and their creative works in interviews we have conducted over recent years. It asks whether we need to deconstruct the current research paradigm that dominates universities and think more laterally about whatconstitutes new knowledge-and it also asks what kind of knowledge that mightbe. It questions whether the research value of many artworks lies not so much intheir explicit addressing of any research question or problem, but in the ways inwhich such works raise issues that throw light on our relationships to the world,language, and the ineffable.",
keywords = "Research, Creativity, Practitioners",
author = "Jen WEBB and Paul HETHERINGTON",
year = "2016",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781612298405",
pages = "1--20",
editor = "Jeri Kroll and Andrew Melrose and Jen Webb",
booktitle = "Old and New, tried and Untried",
publisher = "Common Ground Publishing",
address = "United States",

}

WEBB, J & HETHERINGTON, P 2016, 'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active': Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector. in J Kroll, A Melrose & J Webb (eds), Old and New, tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century. Common Ground Publishing, Champaign, USA, pp. 1-20.

'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active' : Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector. / WEBB, Jen; HETHERINGTON, Paul.

Old and New, tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century. ed. / Jeri Kroll; Andrew Melrose; Jen Webb. Champaign, USA : Common Ground Publishing, 2016. p. 1-20.

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - 'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active'

T2 - Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector

AU - WEBB, Jen

AU - HETHERINGTON, Paul

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Where research active academics are also creative practitioners, the relationshipbetween the notions of 'practice active' and 'research active' is often vexed.Many academics, and academic institutions, would maintain that creative worksdo not in themselves constitute serious research, or make an explicit contribution to the generation of new knowledge. However, artist-academics have for some years contended that their creative work deserves recognition in research terms. As a result in Australia there has been an argument that creative works should be accorded 'research equivalence', thus granting creative works made by academics a status that universities are able to incorporate into their research reporting structures. Yet many academics continue to maintain that creative works are generated by a different kind of impulse than that which motivates researchers; that research papers and creative artifacts are different kinds of things; and that, in any case, even creative artists frequently do not identify their creative outputs as constituting a form of research. This view is as prevalent in the field of creative writing as it is in other creative fields. This paper offers a reflection on issues raised by poets about the relationship between research and their creative works in interviews we have conducted over recent years. It asks whether we need to deconstruct the current research paradigm that dominates universities and think more laterally about whatconstitutes new knowledge-and it also asks what kind of knowledge that mightbe. It questions whether the research value of many artworks lies not so much intheir explicit addressing of any research question or problem, but in the ways inwhich such works raise issues that throw light on our relationships to the world,language, and the ineffable.

AB - Where research active academics are also creative practitioners, the relationshipbetween the notions of 'practice active' and 'research active' is often vexed.Many academics, and academic institutions, would maintain that creative worksdo not in themselves constitute serious research, or make an explicit contribution to the generation of new knowledge. However, artist-academics have for some years contended that their creative work deserves recognition in research terms. As a result in Australia there has been an argument that creative works should be accorded 'research equivalence', thus granting creative works made by academics a status that universities are able to incorporate into their research reporting structures. Yet many academics continue to maintain that creative works are generated by a different kind of impulse than that which motivates researchers; that research papers and creative artifacts are different kinds of things; and that, in any case, even creative artists frequently do not identify their creative outputs as constituting a form of research. This view is as prevalent in the field of creative writing as it is in other creative fields. This paper offers a reflection on issues raised by poets about the relationship between research and their creative works in interviews we have conducted over recent years. It asks whether we need to deconstruct the current research paradigm that dominates universities and think more laterally about whatconstitutes new knowledge-and it also asks what kind of knowledge that mightbe. It questions whether the research value of many artworks lies not so much intheir explicit addressing of any research question or problem, but in the ways inwhich such works raise issues that throw light on our relationships to the world,language, and the ineffable.

KW - Research

KW - Creativity

KW - Practitioners

UR - https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/224707788

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781612298405

SP - 1

EP - 20

BT - Old and New, tried and Untried

A2 - Kroll, Jeri

A2 - Melrose, Andrew

A2 - Webb, Jen

PB - Common Ground Publishing

CY - Champaign, USA

ER -

WEBB J, HETHERINGTON P. 'Research Active' vs. 'Practice Active': Re-imagining the Relationship between the Academy and the Creative arts Sector. In Kroll J, Melrose A, Webb J, editors, Old and New, tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century. Champaign, USA: Common Ground Publishing. 2016. p. 1-20