Practitioner Reflexivity

Practitioner reflexivity is a foundation for methods approved by discourse analysis and PAR. It is arguably a practice that ‘is never complete’ (Ballinger, 2003, pp.67). This expression feels particularly true for the final moment of this methodology due to its characteristics as an art-based, action-research project; signifying its richness to be drawn upon, revised and refined in my ongoing work. This process is enduring and is demonstrated by this thesis. In this methodology I consider three components of reflecting on the research; the thesis, the outcome, and the appendices.

The process of writing this thesis is ‘itself an action research project’ (Coghlan, 2010, pp.151) and therefore, has been an exercise in intense, conclusory reflection. By telling the personal story of how I came to be invested in the uses of language and how this research came about, it has provided a foundation to understand the validity of subjective data (McCrae,

56 Mentimeter is a software programme that enables interaction with audiences. Typically used in teaching, facilitation and presenting research, Mentimeter provided an excellent tool to generate data in the gallery to create word clouds and use real-time voting strategies. See appendices for an example of a user-generated word cloud. See appendix V for examples of mentimeter facilitated during Art, Activism and Language: Feminist Issues in the Gallery.

57 Survey Monkey is an established survey software for academic, education and public research.

2016, pp.4). By using an integrated approach in the practice ‘by, with and for people’ (Reason and McArdle, 2004), PAR has enabled me to create connections between three voices; the first-person voice (myself), the second-person voice (the users) and third-person voice (the field). To me, finding all three voices in my writing feels like excavation. It is a process of searching for what is beyond the surface to access situated knowledge (Elton, 2010, pp.152).

It feels uncomfortable to write because it describes tacit knowledge or ‘knowing-in-action’

(Schön, 1995, pp.29) as a result of the practical research. Many times during the processes of this research, I have put myself at the centre of conflict and my own doubts (Merickel, 1998, pp.83) to find perspectives and ways of working ‘that were not visible before’ (van Engen, 2009, pp.382). Writing this thesis is no different, and arguably the confrontation and reflection of the practitioner on feelings of discomfort defines the spirit of reflexivity (Finlay, 2008, pp.4).

TPG is an outcome of the multi-layered processes of action research and demonstrates the transformation of the processes as a ‘knowledge project’ (Rolling, 2013, pp.108). As a result, the project is difficult to define because it does not exist within its isolated mechanisms;

the title, the outcome or the appendices. In its most graspable, it exists within its pedagogic processes that arguably have ‘no image’ (Bishop, 2012, pp.241) and therefore, the website is a performative representation of the work.

The design process of TPG signified a reflective moment to make sense of the knowledge that was concealed within the physical and digital archives of the research.⁵⁸ Wanting to stay as close to the processes of TPG as possible, I commissioned a colleague who I trust to build an online resource; graphic designer, Thom Isom. After getting to know Thom between 2013 and 2015 whilst we were both studio members at Static Gallery⁵⁹ in Liverpool, he was already aware of my doctoral research and had a wealth of experience in developing

58 In April 2018, I received an anonymous response to the survey that I had conducted that confirmed my approach to creating a resource; 'At least give me a glossary and stop making me feel stupid and unwelcome.' This demand was

reminiscent of the comment cards written by publics and described by staff members at TL; and the countless conversations I’d had with users during workshops over the years.

59 The site that housed QC’s studio between 2013 and 2015.

accessible and usable graphics for institutions committed to socially engaged work⁶⁰. I had already established that developing an identity for the resource would be paramount because it would have to credit co-producers, be appealing to users, limit my artistic authorship and above all, be useful. Subsequently, Thom’s skills in co-design were essential and manifested in several meetings, facilitating user-sessions with members of CC and feedback sessions with professionals at TL. In these meetings we discussed practicalities such as a logo, colour palette, fonts and typography, implementing hand-written components to the design, usability and accessibility. These conversations raised messy theoretical questions pertaining to authorship, the editing process, discourse hierarchy and contemporary conversations around free speech, political correctness and dissent.

To prepare for the design process, I organized the digital data using the methodology from Shared Language in folders labelled ‘keep’, ‘reject’ and ‘discuss’. Using NVivo⁶¹ throughout, I created word clouds and hierarchy tables drawn from previous analysis to ensure the work reflected common themes, patterns and codes appropriated from the interviews.

This relied heavily on my independent work as a practitioner to make distinctions between public accounts and my own as a prominent method⁶², thus forcing me to consider my

‘multiple positionalities’ as a practitioner yet again (Herr and Anderson, 2005, pp.29-48).

During the process I had also noticed that my tasks had become editorial and consisted of proof-reading crowd-sourced content while balancing two variables to make text consumable.

The first required me to keep close to transcriptions to ensure the intent of the contributors.

The second variable demanded that spoken language needed to be ‘decluttered’ before

60 Notably, Thom works with Open Eye Gallery in Liverpool to produce design and graphic work that has been informed by work with young people titled ’Our North’. This is of note due to Open Eye Gallery’s new mission to ‘becoming a more useful gallery’ and to put ‘socially engaged photography practice at the heart’ of what they do. (Why We're Here. (2019) [online]

Available at: https://openeye.org.uk/about/

[Accessed: 03/06/19])

61 NVivo is a software that enables the organisation, management and interpretation of qualitative data.

62 Influenced by this, I also decided to use an interpretative method to capture meaning from the data at a descriptive level.

This allowed for me to interpret symbolic gestures from users to add complexity to the data.

publishing. Both tasks raised serious questions regarding authorship and cultural democracy and are reflected on in the epilogue.

The appendices are comprised of the substantial multi-media culminated over four years of research and represents an observational account of the research. Via research diaries, researcher drawings, photo diaries, the ‘word index’, collective artworks and institutional paraphernalia; turning these visual data into an appendix has been a practice in reflection itself. Notably, ethnographic research undertaken at mima and other sites⁶³ is reflected on in the appendices. At mima, I recorded observations and interactions over five site-visits between May 2016 and October 2017. These encounters took place at an initial site visit with Senior Curator Elinor Morgan and former Director Alistair Hudson, the Arte Útil Summit, Working with Constituents conference and two community days. Specifically, during this moment of the research I chose to concentrate on recording data with counterpublics⁶⁴ and therefore I leant towards capturing data dialogically; by visiting the markets, striking up conversations and ‘hanging out’ as a research methodology (Pfaelzar, 2010, pp.140).The raw data in these appendices are not restricted to these sites only and are auto-ethnographic to document the project holistically (Chaplin, 2011, pp.241).

In this section on reflection, I have clarified three components of reflection during this research comprising the appendices, the outcome and the thesis. Represented within these components are different types of reflexivity; observational, performative and conclusory. In

63 During six site visits to Tŷ Pawb between November 2017 and May 2018, I participated in the opening weekend Dydd Llun Pawb (translated as Everybody’s Monday), attended the revealing of Wal Pawb with artist Katie Cuddon and interviewed the Creative Director Jo Marsh.

64 Counterpublics are individuals who do not actively seek out or visit contemporary art galleries. Theorist Michael Warner defines ‘counterpublics’ in terms of gender and sexuality (Warner, M. (2002) Publics and counterpublics. 1st ed. Cambridge:

MIT Press.) and I have chosen to readopted the term to describe the subculture envisioned by museums as ‘hard-to-reach’

(Culture on Demand: Ways to engage a broader audience (2007) [online]

Available at: https://www.raeng.org.uk/RAE/media/Grant-applications-and-guidelines/Culture-on-Demand-summary.pdf [Accessed: 28/06/19] ). Individuals in this group are creative in their habits and interests but they have little association with TL and may not have ever visited a museum or gallery before.⁶⁴

sum, the components and reflection make up the process that I have named TPG. Importantly, it does not define a set of rules or aspire to police language. Instead, it is a series of processes created to challenge our ideas of legitimate and illegitimate speakers⁶⁵ (Rancière and Panagia, 2000, pp.115), to think critically about how institutions use language and encourage plurality within them. Inherently, this flow of PAR created two types of ‘messiness’ (Askins and Pain, 2011, pp.9). The first ‘refers to the materialities of doing participatory art’ (pp.9) and the creation of a ‘messy social space’ (Torre, 2009, pp.110) to unpick and reflect on.⁶⁶ Second, it created an unwieldy methodology resulting in crossovers (within the research periods), knots (obstacles with institutions and their resources) and friction (conflict between myself, professionals and the producers). In this view, my methodology has sought to bring order to the chaos of action research, but also emphasises that messiness has enabled me to ‘learn a lot more about a far wider range of realities.’ (Law, 2004, pp.10)