In part 5 (this forum), Robert's comments are eye-opening. Mary Elizabeth raises critical questions. Several brought up the problems and potential of introducing to art through reproductions. As of Sunday evening, 7 of the 12 students responded to part 5, which is the most important part of the learning process for this activity--but would be impossible to do without engagement in parts 1-4. Myoungsun, as each facilitator is asked to do, will provide a reflective synthesis as wrap-up for the week's learning activity bringing the particulars of the content from your participation into the larger picture of learning and teaching goals in this activity.
Part 3 was like shopping for me, being a consumer. We will consider consuming and art education during Hongkyu's week of facilitation coming up, Feb. 16-23. It was fun and enticing to create an identity through my choices for this particular group.
I don't think part 4 worked as well as it was intended because participants either did not know about how to layout the page with using tables to design, or to look back at revisions, or the purpose of part 4. Revisits were needed to rearrange as more images were added. However, the potential of part 4 is the heart of the relational theory that Myoungsun is exploring in that this is when the individual is in relationship to others. I think the purpose was to recreate from a representative piece from each but in a way that new relationships would be VISIBLE using the potentials of google.doc not as a blog thread or linear listing but as a document that gets changed again and again with its history (revisions) visible--like a never static, always changing, palimpsest collective identity.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote: > 1. What do you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching? > > 2. What have you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
In looking at Mary Elizabeth's collection I clicked on a few to learn more and this opened to the larger image, and synopsis about the piece, and video presentation about the work. Interesting that the oldest work in the Brooklyn collection that you selected is a hybrid (bird and woman), which connects to some reading you have been doing regarding Haraway's Cyborg manifesto--see http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/4225/Female_Figure
Part 3 was like shopping for me, being a consumer. We will consider consuming and art education during Hongkyu's week of facilitation coming up, Feb. 16-23. It was fun and enticing to create an identity through my choices for this particular group.
I don't think part 4 worked as well as it was intended because participants either did not know about how to layout the page with using tables to design, or to look back at revisions, or the purpose of part 4. Revisits were needed to rearrange as more images were added. However, the potential of part 4 is the heart of the relational theory that Myoungsun is exploring in that this is when the individual is in relationship to others. I think the purpose was to recreate from a representative piece from each but in a way that new relationships would be VISIBLE using the potentials of google.doc not as a blog thread or linear listing but as a document that gets changed again and again with its history (revisions) visible--like a never static, always changing, palimpsest collective identity.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What do you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What have you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?