The Journal of Aesthetic Education

Introduction

Much debated in the curriculum content of cultural studies, the subject of intentionality and interpretation has not been given as much attention in terms of teaching and learning in higher education (HE). Various modernist and postmodernist approaches differ considerably, and these inevitably inform lecturers’ notions, whether consciously or unconsciously. Of particular concern is how such ideas influence teaching, learning, and assessment in creative disciplines such as art, design, music, and creative writing.

In this paper approaches to intentionality and interpretation in a fine art studio practice (FASP) curriculum and the effects of imbalance in this relationship on students’ learning experiences are examined. While the particularities of this South African case can perhaps not be generalized, the relationship between intentionality and interpretation addressed in this case study is of concern for educationalists in a postmodern world. Informed by the conceptual alignment between critical theory’s emancipatory interest, current notions of the “work” of HE, and contemporary art making, this paper draws from relevant arguments and theories in these fields.

Firstly, consideration is given to how HE studies and contemporary art intersect on the issue of agency and reflexivity. The research methodology of this project is then briefly outlined. The third section is a representation of the data analysis, divided into findings relating directly to intentionality and interpretation. A crucial concern is the effects of imbalance of this relationship on student learning, which is explored in section four. Of concern is how the relationship between intentionality and interpretation reflects and models relationships between “self” and “other.” Informed by such notions, the paper concludes with some suggestions for ways forward. If intentionality [End Page 18] is approached as a critical tool, it can be utilized to empower the student-artist in his/her quest for meaning making.¹ When balanced with interpretations of “multiple voices” from lecturers and the student’s peers, such an approach to value judgments may allow an opening of “self” to “other,”² a pertinent concern in terms of the politics of representation and difference in societies facing similar challenges to postapartheid South Africa.

1. Reflexivity in the Relationship between Intentionality and Interpretation

Barnett urges university educators to adopt a conception of the “dialogical character” of understanding, where they should “help students become aware of understandings that they possess but of which they are unaware,” so as to enable them to construct their own voice.³ According to Mezirow’s notion of transformative learning, such “critical consciousness . . . increases a crucial sense of agency over ourselves and our lives.”⁴ Barnett calls this “a process of becoming,” of enabling students to “come into themselves.” Fine art educator Tom Hardy adds that the student in FASP should develop both a “personal voice” and a critical language with which to speak it.⁵

Through personal reason or what is called criticism, critical reflection, or critical thinking,⁶ the adult learner’s existing paradigms are challenged. An holistic understanding of criticality embraces knowledge, self, and the world: what Barnett refers to as “critical being in the world.”⁷ For the position of criticality to be empowering, and truly emancipatory, it must be internalized and enacted in some way—it must be reflexive. In this conception, human intentionality is posited as having the potential to act both self-reflexively and critically within society.

Dewey contends that the essentials for learning are identical with the essentials of reflection: ideas are tested by the student through application so as to make meanings clear and to discover for his/her own self their validity.⁸ This emphasizes the need to engage the student’s personal stance in the learning process in order to enable him/her to take on the role of active agent rather than passive receiver in society.⁹ For students to learn in ways that can be adapted and applied in novel circumstances, they must have some intentionality in the process.¹⁰

At the same time, social and cognitive experiences in education represent interdependent dimensions. The process of learning is shaped through interactions between social and individual contributions but with individuals playing a highly agentic role in those interactions. This suggests that for...