Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:28:39 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
29 SES 03 A: Identifying Visible and Invisible Aspects of Conformity in Arts Education and Research
Research Workshop | ||
    | ||
29. Research on Arts Education
Research Workshop Identifying Visible and Invisible Aspects of Conformity in Arts Education and Research 1: University of Stockholm; 2: University of Girona, Spain; 3: University of Leuven; 4: University of Lisboa; 5: University of Barcelona Presenting Author:Arts education, as well as the presence of art within education, is often expected to be experimental, liberating, and eye opening. Yet those of us working in these fields, much like in other disciplines, sometimes fall into patterns of conformity and stereotypical approaches that need to be challenged. What might these conform patterns or nodes look like? We imagined that they could range from widely political perspectives to very practical exercises within a classroom. For instance: how male and female artists are represented in the teaching of art history; how uncritical approaches to our colonial past persist; or how teaching the arts may become constrained by instrumental, conform methods—for example, in instructing a child how to draw a face with the exact proportions, which leaves no room for the child’s own interpretations and expressions. We were also interested in how the arts are used in other subjects to unfold more dimensions, stimulate, deepen and vitalize different learning processes without becoming too instrumentalized.
How, then, can we recognise these patterns, challenge them and also identify what we have in common? In times of war, violence and individualism, it seems more important than ever to create space for many different voices, but also to find aspects of care in education. It seems imperative to adopt a pedagogy of care (Larsen, 2015; Puig de Bellacasa, 2012) and ethics of care (Pettersen, 2011; Tronto, 2009) with the aim of challenging stereotypes and destructive patterns. In this vein, arts education can become so powerful. In challenging conformity, a lot of work is already being done by artists, researchers and teachers. One can say that it is a dimension that is embedded in the nature of art, to constantly try to reinvent itself and cross borders. With this in mind, we launched a special call for a journal to collect and illuminate some of these examples, how they take shape, and what they can look like, so that we can learn from each other. This workshop builds on the thematic issue Challenging Conformity in Arts Education published in Research in Arts and Education (Onsès & Theorell, 2025). In the associated call for contributions, authors were invited to identify and critically problematize forms of conformity in arts education as they emerge across different national, cultural, and institutional contexts. The editorial highlighted several illustrative examples, including persistent gender imbalances in art history education (Nochlin, 1971; Pollock, 1988), the reproduction of unquestioned colonial perspectives within curricula and research practices (Smith, 2012; Bhambra, Gebrial, & Nişancıoğlu, 2018), and prescriptive pedagogical methods that risk silencing children’s voices by privileging normative outcomes over exploratory processes (Freire, 2000; Biesta, 2013). In addition to these examples, the authors of the call identified further “nodes of conformity” that remain underexamined and that this workshop seeks to address. The overall aim is to further identify, interrogate, and actively challenge patterns of conformity in arts education research and practice, while simultaneously sharing context-specific strategies and fostering transnational dialogue. Central to this aim is an exploration of both visible and invisible forms of conformity in arts education, including political, historical, pedagogical, and methodological dimensions.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Through collective reflection and exchange, participants are invited to critically examine how cultural, political, and institutional contexts shape research agendas, pedagogical choices, and artistic practices (Ball, 2012; Biesta, 2015). Building on this analysis, the workshop creates space for researchers to share concrete examples of artistic and pedagogical strategies that disrupt dominant norms and open alternative modes of knowing and learning (Eisner, 2002; Springgay, Irwin, & Kind, 2005). In a final step, participants are encouraged to collaboratively develop research questions, methodological approaches, or pedagogical impulses that can contribute to the creation of new, unexpected spaces within arts education—spaces that resist instrumentalization and foreground experimentation, difference, and critical engagement (Barone & Eisner, 2012; Leavy, 2015). We suggest the following workshops structure: 1. Opening: Naming the Paradox Participants respond in writing to: Where do I notice conformity in my own research or teaching? What feels difficult to question—even in an “open” arts context? 2. Mapping the Knots of Conformity Participants work in groups of 4–5 to identify “nodes of conformity” at different levels: Political / ideological; Institutional; Pedagogical; Artistic; Research-related. Groups create a visual or spatial “knot map” (paper, post-its, drawing, movement, sound—participants choose the form). Guiding question: Which knots are most persistent, and which are most invisible? 3. Context Matters: Situated Perspectives Building on the “knot map”, groups discuss: How do these knots look different depending on national, cultural, or political contexts? Which constraints are structural, and which are locally produced? Where do we see possibilities rather than obstacles? 4. Practices That Untie: Learning from Examples Participants are invited to share one concrete example from their own research or teaching that: Challenges a dominant norm Opens access or participation Disrupts stereotypical ways of seeing, hearing, or knowing Makes space for learners’ or participants’ voices 5. From Recognition to Action: Research as Intervention Participants formulate: One research question, methodological shift, or pedagogical experiment that responds to a knot they identified earlier. Prompt: How might my research actively create space for new oxygen? They share in pairs, offering feedback focused on: Where conformity is being challenged Whose voices are being centered What risks are being taken 6. Closing: What We Hold in Common Return to a key question: How can we recognize differences while also identifying what we have in common? Optionally, co-create a short collective statement or manifesto for arts education research that resists conformity. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings It is expected to continue and enrich the conversation initiated by the Special Issue with a diverse group of researchers. Mainly: Collect new experiences and ways to understand conformity and ways to challenge it Expand the conversation through arts-based methods Create a solid group for further discussion and seminars in the future References Ball, S. J. (2012). Global Education Inc.: New Policy Networks and the Neoliberal Imaginary. Routledge. Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts Based Research. Sage. Bhambra, G. K., Gebrial, D., & Nişancıoğlu, K. (2018). Decolonising the University. Pluto Press. Biesta, G. (2013). The Beautiful Risk of Education. Paradigm. Biesta, G. (2015). “What is Education For?” European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87. Eisner, E. W. (2002). The Arts and the Creation of Mind. Yale University Press. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum. Leavy, P. (2015). Method Meets Art (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. Nochlin, L. (1971). “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?” ARTnews, 69(9). Onsès-Segarra, J & Theorell, E. ed. Vol. 2025 No. 3 (2025): Thematic Issue on Challenging Conformity in Arts Education and through the Arts in Education, Research in arts and education Aalto university. Pollock, G. (1988). Vision and Difference. Routledge. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies (2nd ed.). Zed Books. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., & Kind, S. (2005). “A/r/tography as Living Inquiry.” Qualitative Inquiry, 11(6), 897–912. | ||