Annie Davey’s (2016) article ‘International Students and Ambiguous Pedagogies within the UK Art School’ raises all sorts of questions about the assumptions at play underneath the fine art pedagogy prevalent in Chelsea and most art schools. I am not only involved in teaching some of these assumptions but also have been taught them myself, through my foundation (2000-01) undergraduate studies at Liverpool School of Art (2001-05) and then at Chelsea where I did a PGDip and MA in Fine Art (2010-11).
Actively not knowing is a central part of the way contemporary artistic practice is configured, drawing heavily on the legacy of conceptualism. My own approach has been influenced by contributing to a research group set up by Jacob Jacobsen to explore John Latham’s idea of AntiKnow (Jacobsen 2006), see images below.
Davey’s article draws on Austerlitz and I followed the research trail to read ‘Mind the Gap’ Austerlitz et al’s (2008) article. “Students entering higher education often seek ‘clarity’ but a central, although largely unspoken tenet of art and design pedagogy would appear to be the centrality of ‘ambiguity’ to the creative process.” [p.127 Austerlitz et al (2008)].
This quote echoed two conversations I recently had with students following their Unit 6 feedback. Both are engaged international students with English as their first language. Both had received B (very good under the UAL Level 5 Marking Matrix). Both were unhappy with this, and wanted to know exactly how to get an A. They wanted clarity and whilst at least one of them was dissatisfied with the ambiguity I was offering in return. “…For those students unfamiliar with the benefits of risk and for whom uncertainty feels far from necessary, productive state these implicit values can be met with confusion and diminished confidence” [Davey (2016) p.380].
There are invisible barriers at play. I’ve had a lot of positive feedback about the course from students, but I recently received some that evidenced that some students felt very much at sea in this ambiguity. I hosted an open meeting welcoming anyone who wanted to voice any frustrations or concerns, and it was illuminating. What became clear was that some students who have not benefited from an arts-based education prior to starting their BA, feel really lost by the ambiguous nature of what we are asking them to do.
Perhaps one of the tasks is to fully conceptualise what our ambiguous pedagogy is, and to do this we must clearly define what we mean by ambiguity. “Rowland argues that there are two different kinds of ambiguity and makes the distinction between vagueness and uncertainty (Rowland 2003). This allows us to differentiate between not taking the process far enough to identify issues and possibilities (vagueness) and the recognition of multiplicity of routes and interpretations with porous boundaries (uncertainty)… There is also a danger of inauthentic ambiguity where there is a discourse of acceptance of diverse outcomes but beneath is a hidden curriculum open only to the privileged few.” [p.142 Austerlitz et al (2008)]. This is a very helpful distinction between vagueness and uncertainty, and one I will be taking forward as I develop the pedagogical frame for Year 2.
518 words
References:
Austerlitz, Noam, Blythman, Margo, Grove-White, Annie, Jones, Barbara Anne, Jones, Carol An, Morgan, Sally, Orr, Susan, Shreeve, Alison and Vaughn, Suzi (2008) Mind the gap: expectations, ambiguity and pedagogy within art and design higher education. In: Drew, Linda, (ed.) The Student Experience in Art and Design Higher Education: Drivers for Change. Cambridge, Jill Rogers Associates Limited, pp. 124-148
Davey, A. (2016). International Students and Ambiguous Pedagogies within the UK Art School. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 35(3), pp.377–383. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12124.
Flattimeho.org.uk. (2025). ANTIKNOW RESEARCH REPORT | Projects | Flat Time House. [online] Available at: https://flattimeho.org.uk/projects/publications/anti-know-research-report/ [Accessed 18 Mar. 2025].
Jakobsen, J. ed. (2006) ‘ANTIKNOW RESEARCH REPORT’ published by FlatTime Ho