Abstract
This paper investigates the nature of motivation in the context of a tertiary art and design studio through a multi-perspectival and mixed methodological study of situated text and talk. Drawing upon the analytical resources of linguistic ethnography, multimodal interaction, and functional linguistics, among others, the study finds that motivation in the studio, while perceived by the tutors in terms of the students’ willingness to complete required project work, is, on further examination, a more complex phenomenon, dynamically related to wider socio-institutional discourses and the students’ conception of their future selves. The paper concludes by reconceptualizing motivation in the art and design studio as a discursively constructed and contested phenomenon, intersubjectively realized across the trajectory of studio genres and inherently related to identity and power. The findings contribute to understandings of motivation, particularly within the context of art and design educational studies.
About the author
Darryl Hocking received his PhD in Linguistics from Macquarie University and a Bachelor of Fine Arts from Auckland University. He is currently a Senior Lecturer at AUT University, New Zealand. His research focuses on the interactional genres and communicative practices in art and design settings and how these impact on creative activity.
Appendix
- ((unintelligible))
Double parentheses with italics enclose transcriber’s comments.
- raises hand
Italics without parenthesis describe nonverbal actions. These descriptions commence approximately where they occur in relation to the verbal data.
- →
An arrow preceding a line indicates analyst’s signal of a significant line.
- –
A dash indicates a truncated intonation unit.
- wor-
A hyphen indicates a truncated word.
- ↑
A rising arrow indicates a relatively strong rising intonation.
- .
A period indicates a falling, final intonation.
- word . word
Dots indicate silence.
- :
A colon indicates an elongated vowel.
- word
Underlined words are louder than usual.
- words [words
- [words
Square brackets indicate the commencement of simultaneous talk.
- wo(h)rd
(h) indicates the word contains laughter.
References
Amabile, Teresa M. 1996. Creativity in context. New York: Springer-Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Ahl, Helene. 2008. Motivation theory as power in disguise. In Andres Fejes & Katherine Nicoll (eds.), Foucault and lifelong learning: Governing the subject, 151–163. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Austerlitz, Noam. 2006. The internal point of view: Studying design students’ emotional experience in the studio via phenomenography and ethnography. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 5(3). 165–177.10.1386/adch.5.3.165_1Search in Google Scholar
Bennet, Rick. 2001. Omnium: A research initiative proposing strategies for quality, collaborative on-line teaching and learning. Education, Communication and Information 1(1). 104–23.Search in Google Scholar
Bhatia Vijay K., Christopher N. Candlin & Jan Engberg. 2008. Legal discourse across cultures and systems. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.10.5790/hongkong/9789622098510.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993. The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. New York: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Burke Johnson, R. & Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie. 2004. Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 33(7). 14–26.10.3102/0013189X033007014Search in Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron V. 1992. The interpenetration of communicative contexts: Examples from medical encounters. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, 291–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron V. 2007. A personal, retrospective view of ecological validity. Text & Talk 27(5/6). 735–752.10.1515/TEXT.2007.033Search in Google Scholar
Candlin, Christopher N. & Jonathan Crichton. 2011. Introduction. In Christopher N. Candlin & Jonathan Crichton (eds.), Discourses of deficit, 1–22. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230299023Search in Google Scholar
Candlin, Christopher N. & Jonathan Crichton. 2012. Emergent themes and research challenges: Reconceptionalizing LSP. In Margrethe Peterson & Jan Engberg (eds.), Current trends in LSP research: aims and methods, 277–316. Bern: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Candlin, Christopher N. & Jonathan Crichton. 2013. From ontology to methodology: Exploring the discursive landscape of trust. In Christopher N. Candlin & Jonathan Crichton (eds.), Discourses of trust, 1–18. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-29556-9Search in Google Scholar
Crichton, Jonathan. 2010. The discourse of commercialization. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.10.1057/9780230295230Search in Google Scholar
Dear, Jacqueline. 2001. Motivation and meaning in contemporary art: From Tate Modern to the primary school classroom. Journal of Art and Design Education 20(3). 274–283.10.1111/1468-5949.00276Search in Google Scholar
Dineen, Ruth & Elspeth Collins. 2005. Killing the goose: Conflicts between pedagogy and politics in the delivery of a creative education. Journal of Art and Design Education 24(1). 43–52.10.1111/j.1476-8070.2005.00422.xSearch in Google Scholar
Dineen, Ruth, Elspeth Collins & Kathryn Livesey. 2005. The promotion of creativity in learners: theory and practice. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 4(3). 155–172.10.1386/adch.4.3.155/1Search in Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Zoltán & Ema Ushioda. 2011. Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar
Efland, Arthur. 1990. A history of art education: Intellectual and social currents in teaching the visual arts. New York: Teachers College Press.Search in Google Scholar
Frey, Bruno & Margit Osterloh (eds.). 2002. Successful management by motivation: Balancing intrinsic and extrinsic incentives. Berlin: Springer-Verlag10.1007/978-3-662-10132-2Search in Google Scholar
Hadfield, Jill & Zoltán Dörnyei. 2013. Motivating learning. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A., K. Christian & M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Hammersley, Martyn & Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in practice. London: RoutledgeSearch in Google Scholar
Hickman, Richard. 2007. (In defence of) whippet-fancying and other vices: Re-evaluating assessment in art and design. In Trevor Rayment (ed.), The problem of assessment in art and design, 85–88. Bristol: Intellect.Search in Google Scholar
Hickman, Richard. 2010. Why we make art: And why it is taught. Bristol: Intellect.Search in Google Scholar
Hocking, Darryl. 2011. The discursive construction of creativity as work in a tertiary art and design environment. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 7(2). 235–25510.1558/japl.v7i2.235Search in Google Scholar
Hocking, Darryl. 2015. The use of corpus analysis in a multi-perspectival study of creative practice. In Paul Baker & Tony McEnery (eds.), Corpora and discourse studies: Integrating discourse and corpora. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137431738_10Search in Google Scholar
Jerrard, Robert & Marie Jefsioutine. 2006. Reflections on using online contracts for work-based learning and teaching in art and design. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 5(1). 55–69.10.1386/adch.5.1.55_1Search in Google Scholar
Laamanen, Tarja-Kaarina & Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen. 2009. Sources of inspiration and mental image in textile design process. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 7(2). 105–119.10.1386/adch.7.2.105_7Search in Google Scholar
Markus, Hazel & Paula Nurius. 1986. Possible selves. American Psychologist 41(9). 954–969.10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954Search in Google Scholar
Norris, Sigrid. 2004. Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203379493Search in Google Scholar
Norris, Sigrid. (2011) Identity in (inter)action: Introducing multimodal (inter)action analysis. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781934078280Search in Google Scholar
Perry, Leslie. 1987. The educational value of creativity. Journal of Art and Design Education 6(3). 285–296.10.1111/j.1476-8070.1987.tb00250.xSearch in Google Scholar
Phillips, Peter L. 2004. Creating the perfect design brief. New York: Allworth Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rampton, Ben. 2006. Language in late modernity interaction in an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486722Search in Google Scholar
Reading, Christina. 2009. Sources of inspiration: How design students learn from museum collections and other sources of inspiration. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 8(2). 109–121.10.1386/adch.8.2.109/1Search in Google Scholar
Reid, Anna & Ian Solomonides. 2007. Design students’ experience of engagement and creativity. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 6(1). 27–39.10.1386/adch.6.1.27_1Search in Google Scholar
Sykes, Janine. 2012. Locating the value and opportunities for online collaborative creativity within advertising. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 11(2). 91–109.10.1386/adch.11.2.91_1Search in Google Scholar
Sung-Yul Park, Joseph & Mary Bucholtz. 2009. Introduction. Public transcripts: entextualization and linguistic representation in institutional contexts. Text and Talk, 29(5), 485–502.10.1515/TEXT.2009.026Search in Google Scholar
Tinwell, Angela. 2013. Game over? Assisting transition from FE to HE level studies for Games Art students. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 12(1). 123–135.10.1386/adch.12.1.123_1Search in Google Scholar
Ushioda, Ema. 2009. A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Zoltán Dörnyei & Ema Ushioda (eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self, 215–228. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691293-012Search in Google Scholar
Webster, Helena. 2003. Facilitating critically reflective learning: Excavating the role of the design tutor in architectural education. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education 2(3). 101–111.10.1386/adch.2.3.101/0Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
