• No results found

Potential issues and further considerations

Several  issues  arose  during  the  research  that  requires  review  and  consideration.      

r-­‐63  

 

The  recording  of  journal  entries  presented  some  challenges  to  consistency  of  the   research  processes.    The  inherent  cognitive  conflicts  between  modes  of  thought  -­‐ ideation  and  recording  –  remain  unresolved.    As  verbalisation  has  been  shown  to   interfere  with  sagasuated  ideation  (Schooler  2002;  Schooler,  Ohlsson  &  Brooks  1993;   Winkielman  &  Schooler  2011),  this  is  an  elemental  neurological  issue  unable  to  be   overcome.      

r-­‐64  

Another  journaling  issue  occurred  during  the  production  of  the  non-­‐digital  exhibited   artworks.    For  example,  the  works  were  created  in  various  locations,  such  as  the  end  of  a   two  kilometre  long  pier  at  Port  Latta,  in  a  boat,  in  a  hospital  ward,  or  in  my  workshop.     Each  of  these  distinctive  locations  made  it  more  difficult  to  stop  and  annotate  the   concepts  as  they  emerged,  which  is  important  as  delays  in  recording  allowed  for   changes  and  evaporation  of  some  ideas.  Poincaré  talks  about  always  having  his   notebook,  which  would  apparently  provide  a  simple  solution,  however,  it’s  worth   considering  the  different  level  of  subjective  agency  between  the  epochs.    Train  and  foot   travel  allow  for  distraction  in  ways  that  driving  a  vehicle  in  traffic  doesn't.    

Unfortunately  therefore,  some  of  the  concepts  that  emerged  during  the  making  of  the   exhibited  works  were  not  recorded,  or  acted  upon.    While  the  ideal  was  to  record  

ideation  immediately,  the  recurrence  of  other  concepts  that  were  journaled  suggests  the   possibility  that  insight  and  understanding  rising  from  the  depths  may  resurface,  

allowing  for  later  recording.    

 

Conflicts  in  cognitive  modes  also  became  relevant  when  switching  between  immersive   periods  of  artwork  and  the  exegetical  elements  of  this  research.    The  review  of  journal   notes  illustrates  awareness  of  this  complexity.    It  is  apparent  that  immersive  cognitions   generated  different  methods  of  thought,  and  moving  from  the  exhibition  production   back  into  the  academic  realm  required  almost  ten  days  to  effectively  move  from  the   open  cognitions  of  the  artwork  production  to  the  lineally  contained  cognitions  required   to  identify,  plan  and  academically  present  the  exegesis.      

R-­‐66  

 

Another  journal  recording  issue  was  its  direct  impact  upon  the  time  left  available  for   artwork  production,  which  resulted  in  occasional  variations  in  the  schedule.    Variation   in  schedules  also  arose  under  pressure  of  deadlines.      

r-­‐67  

 

Other  issues  relate  to  academic  experience,  such  as  those  arising  from  the  breadth  of  the   inter-­‐disciplinarity  of  this  study.    Lack  of  academic  experience  in  each  of  the  fields   explored  during  the  meta-­‐analysis  of  the  data  may  have  allowed  for  mis-­‐interpretation   of  discipline  specific  knowledge.    For  example,  the  term  ‘heuristic’  carries  different   connotations  in  educative  pedagogy  (to  enable  people  to  discover  or  learn  something  for   themselves),  to  the  same  word  in  psychology  (“the  processes  of  breaking  problems   down  into  small  parts  for  simple  resolution”,  Eysenck  1993:149).    Sufficient  reading  is   required  to  ensure  such  terminology  does  not  result  in  mis-­‐interpretation,  which  may   have  unintentionally  occurred  in  this  study.      This  inexperience  may  also  result  in   missing  key  theorists  due  to  unfamiliarity  with  key  terminology,  a  factor  especially   relevant  for  isolated,  ‘distance  ed.’  students.  

r-­‐68  

   

Another  issue  arising  from  lack  of  academic  experience  impacted  upon  the  writing  of   peer-­‐reviewed  papers  for  publication.    As  each  discipline  has  epistemological  etiquettes,   attempting  to  fit  emerging  ‘square’  concepts  into  ‘round’  disciplinary  holes  demanded   greater  time  than  was  readily  available,  and  resulted  in  the  composition  of  fewer  papers   than  had  been  anticipated  by  me  -­‐  the  researcher.    The  annotation  and  research  

conducted  in  this  study,  however,  still  allows  for  the  writing  of  such  papers  upon   completion  of  this  exegesis.    

 

 

Other  potential  academic  limitation  stems  from  lack  of  experience  in  designing,  

producing  and  analysing  extrinsic  statistical  data.    Unforeseen  technical  issues  led  to  the   loss  of  some  environmental  data,  leaving  gaps  that  potentially  undermine  the  veracity  of   the  entire  dataset.    However,  as  such  data  was  not  within  the  direct  gamut  of  the  

research,  having  been  deliberately  minimised  and  included  here  to  enrichen  rather  than   unequivocally  prove,  such  limitations  do  not  in  any  sense  invalidate  the  qualitative   a/r/tographic  nature  of  this  research  project.  

r-­‐70  

 

 

Touchscreen  presentation.  

 

The  touchscreen  presentation  method  of  this  exegesis  is  viewed  as  a  continuation  of  the   artwork.    The  touch  screen  works  as  a  visual  image,  related  to  the  early  artworks   developed  within  the  study.    It  performs  its  role  visually,  and  presents  a  different   method  of  reading  and  knowledge  integration  that  is  new  to  existing  pedagogy.     However,  the  exploratory  nature  of  this  particular  presentation  method  may  impact   upon  its  potential  effectiveness.  

r-­‐72  

 

The  application  of  the  touchscreen  method  increased  the  complexity  of  writing  

encapsulated  within  the  dots,  in  a  way  similar  to  attempting  to  write  a  crossword  puzzle   that  worked  in  both  diagonals,  as  well  as  vertically  and  horizontally.    While  writing   ‘enclosed’  paragraphs  is  a  normal  part  of  academic  writing  -­‐  where  each  paragraph   contains  one  concept  -­‐  the  attempt  to  write  in  self-­‐contained  but  laterally  inter-­‐related   paragraphs  became  very  complex,  especially  given  the  dictate  that  the  exegesis  be   presented  in  the  traditional  lineal  textual  manner,  as  well  as  the  touchscreen,  which   requires  the  text  to  work  in  both  paradigms.    Ironically,  the  complex  inter-­‐relationships   between  the  textual  and  visual  structures  can  create  a  rigidity  resistant  to  amendment.  

r-­‐73  

 

Grouping  text  by  theme  and  relating  those  themes  by  proximity  was  the  goal,  but  reality   has  a  habit  of  challenging  theoretical  ideals.    Practical  considerations  meant  that  

paragraphs  placed  proximally  could  not  always  be  read  in  any  order,  as  "zones  of   proximal  development"  (Vygotsky  1978)  required  delivery  of  certain  aspects  of  the