Performance as research guidelines

I'm not a great fan of these kinds of "best-practice" guidelines with
respect to PaR (even though this is 'performance as research') because
of their tendency to restrict the flexibility of approaches that lends
PaR some of its value. But, I agree with the idea that "Performance as
Research is not a way to re-affirm prescribed convictions of the
researcher, but rather a method through which those convictions can be
re-examined and critically assessed."

Here's the full list: http://adsatemp.wordpress.com/research/

DPaR project presentation/assessment

DPaR project presentation

Wednesday 19 Jan 2011

Tuesday 18 Jan in Mi.131 is set aside for tech rehearsal, and you have the space from 1pm until 10pm (although if you don't want it this late, then please let me know so the studio can be made free for others)
Unless otherwise organised, the projects will be presented in Mi.131 (upstairs studio) or La.008 (if required). Note that the accoustics in Mi.131 are shite at best, so it's worth considering and practicing any audio/spoken aspects of your work.

20 minutes maximum, allowing time for questions (if appropriate)
10 minutes turnaround inbetween each presentation (as required)
11 presentations, all on the 19th – running order to be determined by you, but confirmed with me by Thursday 13 January

Because I have booked Mi.131 from 9am to 6pm on the 19th, I suggest we have 6 presentations in the morning, and 5 in the afternoon. It's going to be a long day, so I think we should try 3, short break, 3, lunch, 3, short break, then final 2. Sound OK?

I'd also like to make it clear that I expect you to attend all of your classmate's presentations, and it would be great to get a few other people along as well (did someone say facebook?). Also, it would be worth drawing up a schedule for the Tuesday so that you each have allocated time that day. Sound OK?

Written (or similar) assessment (as appropriate) due by 10 am on 27 January 2011

Suggested Assessment Criteria
– clear research problem(s) or provocation(s)
– degree to which the research is rigorous and thorough
– imaginative consideration of practice though research
– development of outcome(s) appropriate to research concerns
– locating research within academic and professional contexts

Anything else you think should be addressed, or that shouldn't be addressed?

Hope it's all going well! Am looking forward to them.