The theoretical framework selected for this thesis is performative research. Performative research is a relatively contemporary concept and so still unfolding in its definition
(Haseman, 2006). Some scholars view it as a research methodology or approach (Douglas &
Carless, 2013; Oikarinen-Jabai, 2003), while others see it as a new paradigm in research (Haseman, 2006). However, Brad Haseman (2006), Helena Oikarinen-Jabai (2003), and Kitrina Douglas and David Carless (2013) agree on the need for new approaches, methods and ways of presenting research that go beyond quantitative and qualitative research.
Performative research is what Hasemen (2006), Douglas & Carless (2013), and Oikarinen-Jabai (2003) all agree on as a new opportunity within research.
The use of performative research in arts education has been discussed by Charles R. Garoian (2002), but Garoian defines it as performance art pedagogy. Gorian (2002) took a
performative research approach to find out how teachers could “create curricula that would engage their students in performing critical inquiries as works of art” (p. 171). Garoian was an early adapter and innovator of performative research, and more and more researchers are looking to incorporate performance research in (arts) education in recent years.
Elliot Eisner is another researcher whose descriptions of how art and experience create knowledge has been the guiding light for my performative research. Eisner’s (2008) ideas of knowledge creation focus on different types of knowing, which in turn lead to different ways
of expressing that knowing, which leads to the idea that “knowledge or understanding is not always reducible to language” (p. 5). As Douglas and Carless (2013) describe, performative research has the potential “to provide the audience with an experience” (p. 57). An
experience cannot always be captured with words, giving weight to the need for other forms of both practice and representations of research. Haseman (2006) presents performance research as the third paradigm and alternative to traditional types of research: “In this third category of research – alongside quantitative (symbolic numbers) and qualitative (symbolic words) – the symbolic data work performatively. They not only express the research, but in that expression become the research itself” (2006, p. 102). When Haseman (2006) discusses how the expression is the research itself, I translate this to include both the performative practice and the materials outcomes of that practice with this master’s thesis. The
performative aspects of my research include the teaching, the reflecting, the analysing and the discussion; essentially, I see my entire research process as taking into consideration the performative.
Currently performative research is used in numerous ways both within and without the arts and arts education. Douglas and Carless (2013) discuss how they use it to generate data, create performances, and to explore the process of writing and performing stories and songs with depth. Helena Oikarinen-Jabai (2003) uses performative research with embodied experiences, and narratives from both herself and others to find and express emotions which can be hidden in relationships and cultural discourses. Both Douglas and Carless and
Oikarinen-Jabai use performative research in the space of the arts. In my research I will use performative research in the space of arts education, and specifically within the context of a seventh grade visual arts classroom.
3.1.1 PERFORMATIVE INQUIRY
My methodology has shifted throughout the process of this master’s thesis project. I started my research journey focused on a/r/tography since I identify as an a/r/tographer: an artist, teacher and researcher. Rita L. Irwin (2013) coined the term a/r/tography to encompass three identities and roles in one practice, as well as establish a methodology which encouraged entanglement between these roles. I could relate to this role, since I am a graphic designer, a teacher, and now in this master’s thesis, a researcher. It seemed fitting for my identity to be tied into my methodology, and thus, I started working with a/r/tography as my methodology.
However, as the process moved forward and my focus shifted, so did my understanding of the concept of a methodology. I realized that even thought I identify as an a/r/tographer, I was not researching as one, which led me to understand that I was actually embracing performative inquiry as my methodology instead.
Under the theoretical framework of performative research, both performative inquiry and a/r/tography encourage transformation and the opportunity for changes in direction when engaging in research (Fels, 2019; Irwin, 2013). Performative inquiry and a/r/tography can both be located under the same paradigm, which Lynn Fels (2019) implies is arts-based research, even though I have placed my research under performative research.
The other aspect of a/r/tography which resonates with peformative inquiry is the concept of living inquiry. This is essentially a type of becoming that is constantly in process as a way of living one’s inquiry, to be open to unfolding (Irwin, 2013). Both performative inquiry and a/r/tography embrace the concept of living one’s inquiry, which resulted in a fluid shift from a/r/tography to performative inquiry. Just as living inquiry invites the researcher to be present in their own lives, so does performative inquiry in order for the researcher to reflect on the moments that emerge (Fels, 2019). Performative inquiry is also focused on the performative potentials of stop moments [micro-moments] (Fels, 1999), which corroborates with the shift in my research.
Lynn Fels (1999) conceptualized and articulated in her doctoral thesis the methodology of performative inquiry. Fels (1999) coined the term with the etymological meaning of
performance in mind, as well as the practice of inquiry through the arts. Though Fels (1999, 2012, 2015a, 2015b, 2019) is the preemininent scholar on this contemporary methodology, there is a growing body of work on performative inquiry from a variety of scholars. For example, Ingvild Olsen Olaussen and Lise Hovik (2019) use performative inquiry and
a/r/tography to reflect over Olaussen’s narrative flashbacks (moments where she felt as if she had lost control and was vulnerable in when working with very young children). To return to these moments with performative inquiry allowed Olaussen the opportunity “…to create embodied reflection learning through experimental research” (Olaussen & Hovik, 2019, p.
73).
Another example comes from Liisa Jaakonaho and Kristina Junttila (2019) who also engage in performative inquiry when exploring the theme of disability while searching for
affirmative spaces. They explain that “as artistic pedagogic researchers we are interested in facilitating spaces for performative inquiry, allowing the collective process to inform our thinking and doing, and embodied, tacit knowledge to emerge from the practice” (p. 35).
Since they were focused on understanding disability as a complex phenomenon, but also as a transformative force, performative inquiry allowed them the space to explore while creating new ways of knowing (Jaakonaho & Junttila, 2019).
My research is focused on using my own auto-narratives to find, illustrate, and reflect on different micro-moments I encountered in the classroom. Thus, performative inquiry was the essential choice since, “[p]erformative inquiry… is a practice of noticing stop moments, to be aware of a tug on the sleeve that leads us, upon reflection and inquiry, to learning, moments of recognition” (Fels, 2019, p. 247). This description of performative inquiry as noticing the micro-moments that need attention through reflection and inquiry in order to be able to learn from them, resonates with and speaks to my way of researching. I was feeling “a tug on my sleeve” which came from the reflection over how body language was used in the micro-moments (stop micro-moments) of the classroom. This tug called me to change directions with my research and allowed me to settle on performative inquiry as a core aspect of my
methodology.