Skip to content
1981

A/r/tography (2019)

image of A/r/tography (2019)

Since its conception, a/r/tography has been described as an interdisciplinary, dynamic, and emergent practice, blending visual, narrative, performative, poetic, and other modes of inquiry with qualitative methodologies such as ethnography, autoethnography, autobiography, and participatory or educational action research. Although some a/r/tographers utilize traditional modes of data-gathering methods, such as interviews, transcripts, and field notes, not all practices of a/r/tography refer to the recording or collection of ideas as “data,” and if they do, they are used in combination with, or in relation to, art-making, creative writing, or performance. As an arts-based methodology grounded in the physicality of making and creating, a/r/tography is situated outside traditional research structures. It is framed by a continual process of questioning where understandings are not predetermined and where artistic contexts, materials, and processes create transformative events, interactive spaces in which the reader/viewer/audience can co-create in meaning-making. In short, a/r/tography is an arts-based form of inquiry that disrupts standardized criteria of research while evoking and provoking alternate possibilities for understanding.

Keywords: art-making ; creative arts inquiry ; currere ; diffraction ; emergence ; feminist theory ; in-between ; living inquiry ; metaphor ; new materialism ; performativity ; post-humanism ; post-qualitative inquiry ; process of becoming ; self study

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

A/r/tography (2019)
Intellect , 313 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1386/9781789388688_23
/content/books/9781789388688.c18
/content/books/9781789388688.c18
Loading

Data & Media loading...

References

  1. Aoki, T. T. (1993). Legitimizing lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of multiplicity. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8(3), 255–268.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aoki, T. T. (2005). Spinning inspirited images in the midst of planned and live(d) curricula. In R. L. Irwin &W. F. Pinar (Eds.), Curriculum in a new key (pp. 413–423). Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.331
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. Parallax, 20(3), 168–187.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Barone, T., &Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts based research. SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Barrett, E. (2013). Materiality, affect, and the aesthetic image. In E. Barrett &B. Bolt (Eds.), Carnal knowledge: Towards a “new materialism” through the arts (pp. 63–72). I. B. Tauris.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Belliveau, G. (2015). Performing identity through research-based theatre: Brothers. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 14(1), 5–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bennett, J. (2004). The force of things: Steps toward an ecology of matter. Political Theory, 32(3), 347–372.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bennett, J. (2005). Insides outside: Trauma, affect, and art. In Empathic vision: Affect, trauma, and contemporary art (pp. 22–45). Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bickel, B. (2008). Living the divine spirituality and politically: Art, ritual and performative/pedagogy in women's multi-faith leadership [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  12. Bolt, B. (2004). Art beyond representation: The performative power of the image. I. B. Tauris.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bolt, B. (2009). A performative paradigm for the creative arts? Working Papers in Art and Design, 5(11), 1–12. https://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/12417/WPIAAD_vol5_bolt.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Boulton-Funke, A., Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., &May, H. (2016). Interventions and intraventions of practice based research. In P. Burnard, E. Mackinlay, &K. Powell (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of intercultural arts research (pp. 248–258). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Burke, G. (2013). Immersive art pedagogy: (Re) connecting artist, researcher and teacher [Doctoral exegesis, School of Education, Design and Social Context, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology].
  16. DeLanda, M. (2002). Intensive science and virtual philosophy. Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. Columbia University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Deleuze, G., &Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Viking.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Deleuze, G., &Parnet, C. (2007). Dialogues II. Columbia University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Dias, B. (2006). Border epistemologies: Looking at Almodovar's queer genders and their implications for visual culture education [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  21. Eisner, E. (1997). The promise and perils of alternative forms of data representation. Educational Researcher, 26(6), 4–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy. Routledge/Farmer.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Gouzouasis, P. (2008). Music research in an a/r/tographic tonality. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 5(2), 33–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. Jossey-Bass.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Grosz, E. A. (2001). Architecture from the outside: Essays on virtual and real space. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Grumet, M. (1988). Bitter milk: Women and teaching. University of Massachusetts Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hultman, K., &Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 525–542.332
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Irwin, R. L. (2003). Towards an aesthetic of unfolding in/sights through curriculum. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 1(2), 63–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Irwin, R. L. (2004). A/r/tography: A metonymic métissage. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 27–37). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Irwin, R. L. (2008). Communities of a/r/tographic practice. In Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., Leggo, C., &Gouzouasis, P. (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. 71–80). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Irwin, R. L. (2013). Becoming a/r/tography. Studies in Art Education, 54(3), 198–215.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Irwin, R. L. (2014). Turning to a/r/tography. KOSEA Journal of Research in Art Education, 15(1), 1–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Irwin, R. L., &de Cosson, A. (2004). A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry. Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Irwin, R. L., &Ricketts, K. (2013). Living inquiry: An evolution of questioning and questing. In C. Stout (Ed.), Teaching and learning emergent research methodologies in art education (pp. 65–76). National Art Education Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Irwin, R. L., &Springgay, S. (2008). A/r/tography as practice-based research. In S. Springgay, R. L. Irwin, C. Leggo, &P. Gouzouasis (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. xix–xxxiii). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., Ryu J., &Belliveau, G. (2018). A/r/tography as living inquiry. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts based research (pp. 37–53). Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Jardine, D. (1997). Their bodies swelling with messy secrets. In T. R. Carson &D. J. Sumara (Eds.), Action research as living practice (pp. 161–166). Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kind, S. (2006). Of stones and silences: Storying the trace of the other in the autobiographical and textile text of art/teaching [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  39. LeBlanc, N. (2015). In/visibility of the abandoned school: Beyond representations of school closure [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  40. LeBlanc, N., Davidson, S. F., Ryu, J., &Irwin, R. L. (2015). Becoming through a/r/tography, autobiography and stories in motion. The International Journal of Education Through Art, 11(3), 355–374.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Leggo, C., &Irwin, R. L. (2014). A/r/tography: Always in process. In M. M. Albers (Ed.), New methods in literacy research (pp. 150–162). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2016). “The concept as method” Tracing-and-mapping the problem of the Neuro (n) in the field of education. Cultural Studies-Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 213–223.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. MacDougall, D., Boulton-Funke, A., Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., &May, H. (2018). Encountering research as creative practice: Participants giving voice to the research. In L. Knight &A. Lasczik Cutcher (Eds.), Arts, research, education: Connections and directions (pp. 31–60). Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Madrid Manrique, M. (2014). Creating audiovisual participatory narratives: A/r/tography and inclusivity [Doctoral dissertation, University of Granada].
  46. May, H., O'Donoghue, D., &Irwin, R. L. (2014). Performing an intervention in the space between art and education. International Journal of Education Through Art, 10(2), 163–177.333
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Nancy, J. L. (2000). Being singular plural. Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. O'Sullivan, S. (2006). Art encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought beyond representation. Palgrave MacMillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Kind, S., &Kocher, L. L. M. (2017). Encounters with materials in early childhood education. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Pente, P. (2004). Reflections on artist/researcher/teacher identities: A game of cards. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 91–102). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Pente, P. (2008). Being at the edge of landscape: Sense of place and pedagogy [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  52. Pinar, W. F. (Ed.). (1975). Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. McCutchan.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Pinar, W. F. (1994). Autobiography, politics and sexuality: Essays in curriculum theory 1972–1992. Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Pinar, W. F. (2004a). Foreword. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 9–25). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Pinar, W. F. (2004b). What is curriculum theory? Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Pinar, W. F. (2009). The worldliness of a cosmopolitan education: Passionate lives in public service. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Pinar, W. F. (2010). Currere. In C. Kridel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of curriculum studies (pp. 177–178). SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Pinar, W. F., &Grumet, M. (1976). Toward a poor curriculum. Kendall/Hunt.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Pryer, A. (2004). Living with/in marginal spaces: Intellectual nomadism and artist/researcher/teacher praxis. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 198–213). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Rosiek, J. (2018). Art, agency and ethics in research: How the new materialisms will require and transform arts-based research. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts-based research (pp. 632–648). The Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Rousell, D., Lasczik Cutcher, A., Cook, P. J., &Irwin, R. L. (2018). Propositions for an environmental arts pedagogy: A/r/tographic experimentations with movement and materiality. In A. Cutter-MacKenzie, K. Malone Malone, &E. Barratt Hacking (Eds.), Research handbook on childhood nature (pp. 1–29). Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Springgay, S. (2004). Inside the visible: Youth understandings of body knowledge through touch [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  63. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., Leggo, C., &Gouzouasis, P. (Eds.) (2008). Being with a/r/tography. Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., &Wilson Kind, S. (2005). A/r/tography as living inquiry through art and text. Qualitative Enquiry, 11(6), 897–912.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sullivan, G. (2010). Art practice as research (2nd ed.). SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Suominen Guyas, A. (2008). Water: Moving stillness. In S. Springgay, R. L. Irwin, C. Leggo, &P. Gouzouasis (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. 25–32). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Triggs, V., &Irwin, R. L. (2019). Pedagogy: The a/r/tographic invitation. In E. Hall &N. Meager (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of art and design education (pp. 1–16). Wiley-Blackwell.334
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Triggs, V., Irwin, R. L., &Leggo, C. (2014). Walking art: Sustaining ourselves as arts educators. Visual Inquiry: Learning and Teaching Art, 3(1), 21–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Triggs, V., Irwin, R. L., &O'Donoghue, D. (2014). Following a/r/tography in practice: From possibility to potential. In K. Miglan &C. Smilan (Eds.), Inquiry in action: Paradigms, methodologies and perspectives in art education research (pp. 253–264). National Art Education Association.335
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Aoki, T. T. (1993). Legitimizing lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of multiplicity. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8(3), 255–268.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aoki, T. T. (2005). Spinning inspirited images in the midst of planned and live(d) curricula. In R. L. Irwin &W. F. Pinar (Eds.), Curriculum in a new key (pp. 413–423). Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.331
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. Parallax, 20(3), 168–187.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Barone, T., &Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts based research. SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Barrett, E. (2013). Materiality, affect, and the aesthetic image. In E. Barrett &B. Bolt (Eds.), Carnal knowledge: Towards a “new materialism” through the arts (pp. 63–72). I. B. Tauris.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Belliveau, G. (2015). Performing identity through research-based theatre: Brothers. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 14(1), 5–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bennett, J. (2004). The force of things: Steps toward an ecology of matter. Political Theory, 32(3), 347–372.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bennett, J. (2005). Insides outside: Trauma, affect, and art. In Empathic vision: Affect, trauma, and contemporary art (pp. 22–45). Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bickel, B. (2008). Living the divine spirituality and politically: Art, ritual and performative/pedagogy in women's multi-faith leadership [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  12. Bolt, B. (2004). Art beyond representation: The performative power of the image. I. B. Tauris.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bolt, B. (2009). A performative paradigm for the creative arts? Working Papers in Art and Design, 5(11), 1–12. https://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/12417/WPIAAD_vol5_bolt.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Boulton-Funke, A., Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., &May, H. (2016). Interventions and intraventions of practice based research. In P. Burnard, E. Mackinlay, &K. Powell (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of intercultural arts research (pp. 248–258). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Burke, G. (2013). Immersive art pedagogy: (Re) connecting artist, researcher and teacher [Doctoral exegesis, School of Education, Design and Social Context, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology].
  16. DeLanda, M. (2002). Intensive science and virtual philosophy. Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. Columbia University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Deleuze, G., &Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Viking.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Deleuze, G., &Parnet, C. (2007). Dialogues II. Columbia University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Dias, B. (2006). Border epistemologies: Looking at Almodovar's queer genders and their implications for visual culture education [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  21. Eisner, E. (1997). The promise and perils of alternative forms of data representation. Educational Researcher, 26(6), 4–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy. Routledge/Farmer.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Gouzouasis, P. (2008). Music research in an a/r/tographic tonality. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 5(2), 33–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. Jossey-Bass.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Grosz, E. A. (2001). Architecture from the outside: Essays on virtual and real space. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Grumet, M. (1988). Bitter milk: Women and teaching. University of Massachusetts Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hultman, K., &Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 525–542.332
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Irwin, R. L. (2003). Towards an aesthetic of unfolding in/sights through curriculum. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 1(2), 63–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Irwin, R. L. (2004). A/r/tography: A metonymic métissage. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 27–37). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Irwin, R. L. (2008). Communities of a/r/tographic practice. In Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., Leggo, C., &Gouzouasis, P. (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. 71–80). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Irwin, R. L. (2013). Becoming a/r/tography. Studies in Art Education, 54(3), 198–215.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Irwin, R. L. (2014). Turning to a/r/tography. KOSEA Journal of Research in Art Education, 15(1), 1–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Irwin, R. L., &de Cosson, A. (2004). A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry. Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Irwin, R. L., &Ricketts, K. (2013). Living inquiry: An evolution of questioning and questing. In C. Stout (Ed.), Teaching and learning emergent research methodologies in art education (pp. 65–76). National Art Education Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Irwin, R. L., &Springgay, S. (2008). A/r/tography as practice-based research. In S. Springgay, R. L. Irwin, C. Leggo, &P. Gouzouasis (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. xix–xxxiii). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., Ryu J., &Belliveau, G. (2018). A/r/tography as living inquiry. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts based research (pp. 37–53). Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Jardine, D. (1997). Their bodies swelling with messy secrets. In T. R. Carson &D. J. Sumara (Eds.), Action research as living practice (pp. 161–166). Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kind, S. (2006). Of stones and silences: Storying the trace of the other in the autobiographical and textile text of art/teaching [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  39. LeBlanc, N. (2015). In/visibility of the abandoned school: Beyond representations of school closure [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  40. LeBlanc, N., Davidson, S. F., Ryu, J., &Irwin, R. L. (2015). Becoming through a/r/tography, autobiography and stories in motion. The International Journal of Education Through Art, 11(3), 355–374.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Leggo, C., &Irwin, R. L. (2014). A/r/tography: Always in process. In M. M. Albers (Ed.), New methods in literacy research (pp. 150–162). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2016). “The concept as method” Tracing-and-mapping the problem of the Neuro (n) in the field of education. Cultural Studies-Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 213–223.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. MacDougall, D., Boulton-Funke, A., Irwin, R. L., LeBlanc, N., &May, H. (2018). Encountering research as creative practice: Participants giving voice to the research. In L. Knight &A. Lasczik Cutcher (Eds.), Arts, research, education: Connections and directions (pp. 31–60). Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Madrid Manrique, M. (2014). Creating audiovisual participatory narratives: A/r/tography and inclusivity [Doctoral dissertation, University of Granada].
  46. May, H., O'Donoghue, D., &Irwin, R. L. (2014). Performing an intervention in the space between art and education. International Journal of Education Through Art, 10(2), 163–177.333
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Nancy, J. L. (2000). Being singular plural. Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. O'Sullivan, S. (2006). Art encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought beyond representation. Palgrave MacMillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Kind, S., &Kocher, L. L. M. (2017). Encounters with materials in early childhood education. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Pente, P. (2004). Reflections on artist/researcher/teacher identities: A game of cards. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 91–102). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Pente, P. (2008). Being at the edge of landscape: Sense of place and pedagogy [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  52. Pinar, W. F. (Ed.). (1975). Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. McCutchan.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Pinar, W. F. (1994). Autobiography, politics and sexuality: Essays in curriculum theory 1972–1992. Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Pinar, W. F. (2004a). Foreword. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 9–25). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Pinar, W. F. (2004b). What is curriculum theory? Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Pinar, W. F. (2009). The worldliness of a cosmopolitan education: Passionate lives in public service. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Pinar, W. F. (2010). Currere. In C. Kridel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of curriculum studies (pp. 177–178). SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Pinar, W. F., &Grumet, M. (1976). Toward a poor curriculum. Kendall/Hunt.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Pryer, A. (2004). Living with/in marginal spaces: Intellectual nomadism and artist/researcher/teacher praxis. In R. L. Irwin &A. de Cosson (Eds.), A/r/tography: Rendering self through arts-based living inquiry (pp. 198–213). Pacific Educational Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Rosiek, J. (2018). Art, agency and ethics in research: How the new materialisms will require and transform arts-based research. In P. Leavy (Ed.), Handbook of arts-based research (pp. 632–648). The Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Rousell, D., Lasczik Cutcher, A., Cook, P. J., &Irwin, R. L. (2018). Propositions for an environmental arts pedagogy: A/r/tographic experimentations with movement and materiality. In A. Cutter-MacKenzie, K. Malone Malone, &E. Barratt Hacking (Eds.), Research handbook on childhood nature (pp. 1–29). Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Springgay, S. (2004). Inside the visible: Youth understandings of body knowledge through touch [Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia].
  63. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., Leggo, C., &Gouzouasis, P. (Eds.) (2008). Being with a/r/tography. Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., &Wilson Kind, S. (2005). A/r/tography as living inquiry through art and text. Qualitative Enquiry, 11(6), 897–912.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sullivan, G. (2010). Art practice as research (2nd ed.). SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Suominen Guyas, A. (2008). Water: Moving stillness. In S. Springgay, R. L. Irwin, C. Leggo, &P. Gouzouasis (Eds.), Being with a/r/tography (pp. 25–32). Sense.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Triggs, V., &Irwin, R. L. (2019). Pedagogy: The a/r/tographic invitation. In E. Hall &N. Meager (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of art and design education (pp. 1–16). Wiley-Blackwell.334
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Triggs, V., Irwin, R. L., &Leggo, C. (2014). Walking art: Sustaining ourselves as arts educators. Visual Inquiry: Learning and Teaching Art, 3(1), 21–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Triggs, V., Irwin, R. L., &O'Donoghue, D. (2014). Following a/r/tography in practice: From possibility to potential. In K. Miglan &C. Smilan (Eds.), Inquiry in action: Paradigms, methodologies and perspectives in art education research (pp. 253–264). National Art Education Association.335
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9781789388688.c18
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
/content/books/9781789388688.c18
dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9781789388688
Book
false
en
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test