Art262 Example

1 Scholarship in Practice Example Syllabi ARTH262 Public Art For non-majors Course discipline/field (body of scholarship that is applied in this course): Art History and Archaeology Project or practice central to the Scholarship in Practice course design: One digital project/intervention, completed in teams Course Design: Project completed in stages This syllabus: 1. Includes the Scholarship in Practice learning outcomes. This course has additional learning outcomes that allow the course to also meet the expectations of Humanities. (See text 1) 2. Indicates that non-major students build their knowledge and skills through readings, class participation, and a series of “response” papers. (See text 2, 3) 3. Reveals that significant points are allotted to the scholarship in practice work. (See text 4, 5) 4. Shows how students will meet Scholarship in Practice outcomes and that students will be engaged in the Scholarship in Practice work over the course of the semester vs a project at the end of the semester. (See text 6, 7, 8) 5. Assignments are named according to terminology of the field. (See text 9) Indicates how the outcomes will be met: 6. Outcome # 1: students select and critically evaluate the literature to support the Digital Project/Intervention with learning assessed via response papers. (See text 10) 7. Outcome # 2: students apply scholarship to the Digital Project/Intervention. (See text 11) 8. Outcome # 3: students work is critiqued and students have the opportunity to revise and refine their project in a manner that very much reflects the experience of a design studio. (See text 12, 13) 9. Outcome # 4: students have opportunities to present their work. (See text 14, 15) 10. Outcome # 5: students work in teams to complete their projects. (See text 16, 17) Assessment of gains in collaboration includes self and peer evaluations. (See text 18) 2 Public Art ARTH 262 Professor Abigail McEwen Thursdays, 2:00-4:30 Art/Sociology Building, Room 3219 mcewen@umd.edu Office Hours: Thursdays, 11:00-1:00 and by appointment Art/Sociology Building, Room 4206 Course Description How does public art function on a university campus, in major cities, and across the United States? Can emerging technologies support the interpretation, experience, and reception of public art in new, and imaginative, ways? This course invites students to empirically study the modern history and civic values of public art spanning sculpture, painting, mixed-media, and installation. We consider the nature of public space, the politics of representation and community, and the civic and memorial functions of art. Leveraging a panoply of digital tools, students generate metadata, prototype creative interventions and experiences, and collectively write a communitysourced history of public art. This project begins on campus in the form of our website (http://got-art.artinterp.org/omeka/), built around an interactive map of public art at UMD. Taking the campus as our laboratory, we work in teams to analyze artworks from the bronze Testudo in front of McKeldin Library to the statue of Frederick Douglass on Hornbake Plaza, integrating traditional and digital research methods in our experiments and interventions. Final projects will be published—and student contributions acknowledged—on our Public Art website. Assigned Readings All course readings are available on reserve at the Art Library or on electronic reserve (ELMS). Course Goals Students who successfully complete this course will gain an ability to: 1. Demonstrate knowledge of public art—encompassing artistic monuments, objects, and performances—in its cultural, historical, political, and social contexts 2. Communicate effectively about public art in both speech and writing, using clear and concise prose to advance logical arguments supported by adequate and appropriately cited research materials 3. Employ the appropriate technologies for conducting research in the history of art, including print sources and electronic information as well as digital tools 4. Recognize the methods and theories used to ask and address significant questions about works of public art, and understand the values informing them 5. Build personal, group, and social responsibility through the design and completion of a digital project in teams 3 Learning Outcomes1 A student who successfully completes this course for Humanities credit will be able to: 1. Demonstrate familiarity and facility with the fundamental terminology and concepts of art history 2. Demonstrate understanding of the methods used by scholars in art history 3. Demonstrate critical thinking in the evaluation of sources and arguments in scholarly works in the humanities 4. Demonstrate understanding of the creative process and techniques used by practitioners in a specific field of the visual, literary, or performing arts Students who successfully complete this course for Scholarship in Practice credit will be able to: 5. Select and critically evaluate areas of scholarship relevant to the practice of Art History and Archaeology 6. Apply relevant methods and frameworks to the planning, modeling, and/or preparing necessary to produce a project or participate in the practice in a manner that is authentic to Art History & Archaeology 7. Critique, revise, and refine a project, or the practice of Art History & Archaeology, according to the authentic manner of the discipline 8. Effectively communicate the application of scholarship through ancillary material (written, oral, and/or visual) 9. Collaborate in order to bring about a successful outcome Course Grading See undergraduate catalogue for description of grades, e.g., A+, A, A-, etc.: http://www.umd.edu/catalog/index.cfm/show/content.section/c/27/ss/1584/s/1534 100 – 97: A+ 89 – 87: B+ 79 – 77: C+ 69 – 67: D+ 59 and below: F 96 – 93: A 86 – 83: B 76 – 73: C 66 – 63: D 92 – 90: A- 82 – 80: B- 72 – 70: C- 62 – 60: D40% Digital Project / Intervention 20% Response Papers 10% Presentation 10% Final Exam 20% Participation and Discussion 4 Digital Project / Intervention (CG1, CG2, CG3, CG4, CG5, LO1, LO2, LO4, LO6, LO7, LO8, LO9)2, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 Students will work with an assigned team to design and carry out a digital project or intervention related to public art on campus. Projects may employ methods and technologies including, but not limited to: audiovisual editing and narration; interviews and oral histories; archival research; GIS and mapping; augmented- and mixed-reality; 3D modeling and printing; photography; social media; and community outreach. Students will have an opportunity to meet and consult with staff at the Collaboratory, the Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities, the Art Gallery, Stamp Gallery, Facilities Management, and University Archives. Projects must be approved by Professor McEwen. Project grades are based on submitted minutes from planning meetings; the project proposal; the team’s semester-long collaboration and allocation of work, determined by self- and peer review; and the quality of the final project. In order for the project to succeed, it is expected that each student will contribute fully to the work of the team. At the conclusion of the team project, students will have the opportunity to evaluate their peers. If peer review indicates that certain team members have not contributed to the team project to the expected level, those students will receive a percentage of the team grade that reflects their level of participation. Students will have the opportunity to work on their projects in class every week and will receive feedback throughout the semester from Professor McEwen and their peers; projects may be revised as needed and in consultation with Professor McEwen.18 Teams will be assigned by September 12. The Project Proposal is due on October 3. Brief meeting minutes are submitted four times: October 3, October 24, November 14, and December 5. Teams will report on their Project to the class informally, lightning-round style, each week that we meet in our classroom. The final Team Project, including self- and peer evaluations, is due on December 5. The Team Project is graded as follows: Project Proposal: 15 points Meeting Minutes: 15 points Self- and Peer Evaluations: 15 points Final Project: 55 points Response Papers (CG1, CG4, LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4, LO5)4, 6 Students will write ten one-page (300-400 word) papers over the course of the semester (weeks indicated on the Course Schedule), to be submitted through ELMS. These papers are due on Tuesday evenings. These papers may be informal in style but should reflect upon an aspect of the week’s readings; they need not be comprehensive but should present a critique of the text or a question raised therein (and refer to specific passages as appropriate). Note that there are eleven response papers indicated on the syllabus; students need only submit ten papers (of their choice). 5 Response Papers are scored on a scale of 0 to 3 points: 0 No submission 1 Minimal attempt, indicating carelessness or lack of effort 2 Adequate attempt, indicating engagement with the reading 3 Strong analysis, indicating sophisticated understanding of the reading 10-15 points: 100% 5-9 points: 75% 0-4 points: 0% Presentation (CG1, CG2, CG5, LO1, LO2, LO4, LO8, LO9)8, 15, 17 Teams will have approximately twenty minutes to present their projects on the final day of class (December 5). Please plan and rehearse your presentations, including use of visual aids, in advance. Presentations should describe and briefly assess the project, reflecting on its achievements and its challenges. The presentation may be managed by the entire team or by designated members (as reflected in meeting minutes and the agreed-upon delegation of work). Team presentations are assessed as follows: ▪ Description (or demonstration) and assessment of project (10 points) ▪ Clarity of organization and preparation (3 points) ▪ Time management (2 points) Final Exam (CG1, CG2, CG4, LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4, LO5)7 A take-home, essay-based final exam will ask students to reflect broadly on the social mission of public art and their work throughout the semester. More details will be provided in class. Class Participation Active participation is essential to the success of the course. Students are encouraged to ask questions during and participate in discussions of class readings and assignments, particularly our exhibition. Come prepared to contribute to class by carefully reading the texts assigned for that day. Participation is scored weekly on a scale of 0 to 3: 0 Absent (unexcused) 1 Present; little or no engagement in discussion 2 Present; prepared and able to contribute to discussion 3 Present; well prepared and a leader in discussion Average score of 2.5 or higher: 100% Average score of 2.0 to 2.4: 95% Average score of 1.5 to 1.9: 85% Average score of 1 to 1.4: 75% Average score of 0.5 to 0.9: 65% Average score below 0.5: 55% 6 Communication Professor McEwen uses email to convey important information, and students are responsible for keeping their email address up to date and must ensure that forwarding to another address functions properly. Failure to check email, errors in forwarding, and returned email are the responsibility of the student and do not constitute an excuse for missing announcements or deadlines. Emergency Protocol In the event of official university schedule adjustments (e.g., closings or delays due to inclement weather or campus emergency), Professor McEwen will address any modifications to the syllabus and lecture schedule at the first class meeting following the canceled class(es) and, if possible, through e-mail. However, expect that a test scheduled or paper due on the day of a canceled class will be automatically moved forward to the first class meeting following the cancellation. Course Evaluations Please evaluate the course both in the department’s paper format and online: www.courseevalum.umd.edu/. Both evaluations are very helpful to faculty and to future students alike. Course Procedures and Policies NB: A full list of course-related policies and relevant links to resources may be found at: http://www.ugst.umd.edu/courserelatedpolicies.html Attendance and Absences: Students are expected to attend classes regularly. Consistent attendance offers students the most effective opportunity to gain command of course concepts and materials. Events that justify an excused absence include: religious observances; mandatory military obligation; illness of the student or illness of an immediate family member; participation in university activities at the request of university authorities; and compelling circumstances beyond the student’s control (e.g., death in the family, required court appearance). Absences stemming from work duties other than military obligation (e.g., unexpected changes in shift assignments) and traffic/transit problems do not typically qualify for excused absence. Students claiming an excused absence must notify the course instructor in a timely manner and provide appropriate documentation. The notification should be provided either prior to the absence or as soon afterwards as possible. In the case of religious observances, athletic events, and planned absences known at the beginning of the semester, the student must inform the instructor during the schedule adjustment period. All other absences must be reported as soon as is practical. The student must provide appropriate documentation of the absence. The documentation must be provided in writing to the instructor by the means specified in this syllabus. The full university attendance/absence policy can be found here: 7 http://www.ugst.umd.edu/courserelatedpolicies.html Academic integrity: The UMD Honor Code prohibits students from cheating on exams, plagiarizing papers, submitting the same paper for credit in two courses without authorization, buying papers, submitting fraudulent documents and forging signatures. On every examination, paper or other academic exercise not exempted by the instructor, students must write by hand and sign the following pledge: I pledge on my honor that I have not given or received any unauthorized assistance on this examination (or assignment). Allegations of academic dishonesty will be reported directly to the Student Honor Council: http://www.shc.umd.edu Students who engage in academic dishonesty in this course will receive no points for the assignment in question and will be immediately reported to the Honor Council and Office of Judicial Programs for further action. There will be no warnings. Remember, cheating, plagiarism or other types of fabrication are never worth it.” Definitions for plagiarism, fabrication, cheating, etc. can be found at: http://www.ugst.umd.edu/courserelatedpolicies.html Disability Support: The University of Maryland is committed to creating and maintaining a welcoming and inclusive educational, working, and living environment for people of all abilities. The University of Maryland is also committed to the principle that no qualified individual with a disability shall, on the basis of disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of the University, or be subjected to discrimination. The University of Maryland provides reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals. Reasonable accommodations shall be made in a timely manner and on an individualized and flexible basis. Discrimination against individuals on the grounds of disability is prohibited. The University also strictly prohibits retaliation against persons arising in connection with the assertion of rights under this Policy. Accessibility & Disability Service (ADS) facilitates reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals. For assistance in obtaining an accommodation, contact Accessibility and Disability Service at 301.314.7682, or adsfrontdesk@umd.edu. More information is available from the Counseling Center. After receiving an Accommodations Letter from ADS, as a student you are expected to meet with each course instructor, in person, to provide them with a copy of the Accommodations Letter and to obtain their signature on the Acknowledgement of Student Request form. You and your instructors will discuss a plan for how the accommodations will be implemented throughout the semester for the course. Specific details regarding the implementation of certain ADS approved accommodations agreed upon between you as the student and the individual course instructor must be documented on an Acknowledgment of Student Request Addendum, signed by the instructor, and submitted to ADS. You as the 8 student are responsible for submitting the signed original forms to ADS and retaining a copy of the signed Acknowledgment of Student Request for your records. Copyright notice: Class lectures and other materials are copyrighted. They may not be reproduced for anything other than personal use without written permission from the instructor. Copyright infringements may be referred to the Office of Student Conduct. Academic accommodations for students who experience sexual misconduct: The Sexual Misconduct Policy prohibits a broad range of behaviors including, but not limited to sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking and dating and domestic violence. The Sexual Misconduct Policy also prohibits retaliation against any individual who files a complaint or participates in an investigation under the Policy. The Office of Civil Rights & Sexual Misconduct (OCRSM) responds to all complaints of sexual misconduct. To file a complaint go to OCRSM and under Reporting, complete the online sexual misconduct complaint form. For more information please contact OCRSM by phone at 301-405-1142, or email at titleixcoordinator@umd.edu University Policy VI-1.60(A) University of Maryland Sexual Misconduct Policy & Procedures Summary of Sexual Misconduct Policy Resources Office of Civil Rights & Sexual Misconduct For information about the University's compliance with Title IX as well as other federal and state civil rights laws and regulations. Office of Student Conduct Use Anonymous Ask for a safe, anonymous space to ask about the Code of Academic Integrity, the Code of Student Conduct, or any conduct-related questions through the Office's. Resident Life, Office of Rights & Responsibilities Confidential Resources A confidential resource keeps whatever information you share private. The resource provider will not share your information with others. CARE to Stop Violence, 24 hour call/text: 301-741-3442 Campus Chaplains, 301-405-8450 or 301-314- 9866 University Counseling Center, 301-314-7651 University Mental Health Services 301- 314-8106. Diversity: The University of Maryland values the diversity of its student body. Along with the University, I am committed to providing a classroom atmosphere that encourages the equitable participation of all students regardless of age, disability, ethnicity, gender, national origin, race, religion, or sexual orientation. Potential devaluation of students in the classroom that can occur by reference to demeaning stereotypes of any group and/or overlooking the contributions of a particular group to the topic under discussion is inappropriate. 9 For information on elms, counseling, health, learning workshops, tutoring, writing help, student rights in undergrad courses, questions about graduation or add/drop/withdraw, please see http://www.ugst.umd.edu/courserelatedpolicies.html. 10 SCHEDULE3, 9 August 29: Introductions and Campus Walking Tour Reading: Deutsche, “Public Art and its Uses” September 5: The Public Sphere Visit to the Collaboratory Due: Response Paper 1 Reading: Sennett, “The Public Domain” Habermas, “Introduction” Hiss, “Experiencing Places” Lefebvre, “The Right to the City” September 12: Public Art in the United States I Visit with Special Collections / University Archives Due: Response Paper 2 Reading: Venturi et al, “From Rome to Las Vegas” Mitchell, “Introduction” Cartiere and Willis, “A Timeline…” Lacy, “Introduction” September 19: Public Art in the United States II Due: Response Paper 3 Reading: Kosnoski, “Democratic Vistas” Light, “The City as National Resource” Park and Markowitz, “New Deal for Public Art” Beck and Ross, “Situating Sculpture…” Reynolds, “Beyond the Green Cube” September 26: Digital Public Art Due: Response Paper 4 Reading: Freeman and Sheller, “Hybrid Space and Digital Public Art” Gauthier, “Networked Monumental…” October 3: Memorials and Memory Due: Project Proposal, Meeting Minutes 1, and Response Paper 5 Reading: Weinstein, “Names Carried into the Future” Sturken, “The Wall and the Screen Memory” Gopnik, “Stones and Bones” October 10: Site Specificity Due: Response Paper 6 Reading: Kwon, “Genealogy of Site Specificity” Rendell, “Space, Place, and Site…” 11 October 17: Public Art on College Campuses Visit with The Art Gallery (UMD) Due: Response Paper 7 Reading: Zebracki, Sumner, and Speight, “(Re)Making Public Campus Art” Bober and Douberley, “Curating on Campus: A Dialogue” October 24: Community Values and Representation Due: Meeting Minutes 2 and Response Paper 8 Reading: Mitchell, “The Violence of Public Art” Kramer, “Whose Art Is It?” Foster, “The Artist as Ethnographer?” October 31: Walking Tour: Greater College Park Review: College Park Arts Exchange (http://cpae.org/arts/) Hyattsville Public Art Locator (https://hycdc.org/thearts/public-art/public-art-locator/) November 7: Controversies: Tilted Arc, Vietnam Veterans Memorial Due: Response Paper 9 Reading: Storr, “Tilted Art: Enemy of the People?” Griswold, “The Vietnam Veterans Memorial…” Menand, “The Reluctant Memorialist” November 14: Patronage: Public and Private Interests Due: Meeting Minutes 3 and Response Paper 10 Reading: Doss, “Public Art in the Corporate Sphere” Flanagan, “The Millennium Park Effect” Tomkins, “Big Art, Big Money” Jovanovich-Kelley, “The Apotheosis of Power” Saltz, “New York has Solved…” November 21: Street Art: Murals and Graffiti Due: Response Paper 11 Reading: Collins, “Banksy Was Here…” Doss, “Raising Community Consciousness” November 28: No class (Happy Thanksgiving!) December 5: Student Presentations Due: Meeting Minutes 4, Self- and Peer Evaluations, and Final Project December 16: Final Exam due (ELMS) 12 Bibliography Beck, Kim and Lauren Ross. “Situating Sculpture in the Urban Landscape: A Dialogue.” Public Art Dialogue 1, no. 2 (2011): 193-201. Bober, Andrée and Amanda A. Douberley. “Curating on Campus: A Dialogue.” Public Art Dialogue 7, no. 1 (2017): 90-103. Cartiere, Cameron and Shelly Willis. The Practice of Public Art. New York: Routledge, 2008. Collins, Lauren. “Banksy was Here—The Invisible Man of Graffiti Art.” New Yorker, May 7, 2007, 54-67. Deutsche, Rosalind. “Public Art and its Uses.” In Critical Issues in Public Art: Content, Context, and Controversy, edited by Harriet F. Senie and Sally Webster, 158-70. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1998. Doss, Erika. Spirit Poles and Flying Pigs: Public Art and Cultural Democracy in American Communities. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995. Flanagan, Regina M. “The Millennium Park Effect: A Tale of Two Cities.” In The Practice of Public Art, edited by Cameron Cartiere and Shelly Willis, 133-51. New York: Routledge, 2008. Foster, Hal. “The Artist as Ethnographer.” In The Return of the Real: The Avant-Garde at the End of the Century, 171-203. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996. Freeman, John Craig and Mimi Sheller. “Hybrid Space and Digital Public Art.” Public Art Dialogue 5, no. 1 (2015): 1-8. Gauthier, Dylan. “Networked Monumental: Site, Production, and Distributed Publics—Online, and in Everyday Life.” Public Art Dialogue 5, no. 1 (2015): 17-54. Gopnik, Adam. “Stones and Bones: Visiting the 9/11 Memorial and Museum.” New Yorker, July 17, 2014, 38-44. Griswold, Charles L. and Stephen S. Griswold. “The Vietnam Veterans Memorial and the Washington Mall: Philosophical Thoughts on Political Iconography.” Critical Inquiry 12, no. 4 (Summer 1986): 688-719. Habermas, Jürgen. Introduction to The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, 1-26. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989. Hiss, Anthony. “Experiencing Places.” New Yorker, June 22, 1987, 45-68. Jovanovich-Kelley, Monica. “The Apotheosis of Power: Corporate Mural Commissions in Los Angeles during the 1930s.” Public Art Dialogue 4, no. 1 (2014): 42-70. Kosnoski, Jason. “Democratic Vistas: Frederick Law Olmstead’s Parks as Spatial Mediation of Urban Diversity.” Space and Culture 14, no. 1 (2011): 51-66. Kramer, Jane. “Whose Art Is It?” New Yorker, December 21, 1992, 80-109. Kwon, Miwon. One Place after Another: Site-Specific Art and Locational Identity. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002. Lacy, Suzanne. Introduction to Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art. Seattle: Bay Press, 1995. Lefebvre, Henri. “The Right to the City.” In Writings on Cities, edited by Eleonore Kofman and Elizabeth Lebas. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. Light, Jennifer S. “The City as National Resource: New Deal Conservation and the Quest foro Urban Improvement.” Journal of Urban History 35, no. 4 (2009): 531-60. Menand, Louis. “The Reluctant Memorialist.” New Yorker, July 8, 2002, 55-65. Mitchell, W.J.T., ed. Art and the Public Sphere. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. 13 Park, Marlene and Gerald E. Markowitz, “New Deal for Public Art.” In Critical Issues in Public Art, edited by Harriet F. Senie and Sallie Webster. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1998. Rendell, Jane. “Space, Place, and Site in Critical Spatial Arts Practice.” In The Practice of Public Art, edited by Cameron Cartiere and Shelly Willis, 33-55. New York: Routledge, 2008. Reynolds, Rebecca Lee. “Beyond the Green Cube: Typologies of Experience at American Sculpture Parks.” Public Art Dialogue 1, no. 2 (2011): 215-40. Saltz, Jerry. “New York has Solved the Problem of Public Art: But at What Cost?” New York, December 17, 2015. Sennett, Richard. “The Public Domain.” In The Fall of Public Man, 3-27. New York: Vintage Books, 1976. Storr, Robert. “Tilted Art: Enemy of the People?” Art in America 73 (September 1985): 90-7. Sturken, Marita. Tourists of History: Memory, Kitsch, and Consumerism from Oklahoma City to Ground Zero. Durham: Duke University Press, 2007. Tomkins, Calvin. “Big Art, Big Money: Julie Mehretu’s ‘Mural’ for Goldman Sachs.” New Yorker, March 29, 2010, 62-9. Venturi, Robert, Denise Scott Brown, and Steven Izenour. “From Rome to Las Vegas.” In Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972. Weinstein, Jeff. “Names Carried into the Future: An AIDS Quilt Unfolds. In Art in the Public Interest, edited by Arlene Raven, 43-54. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1989. Zebracki, Martin, Ann Sumner, and Elaine Speight. “(Re)Making a Public Campus Art: Connecting the University, Publics and the City. Public Art Dialogue 7, no. 1: 6-43.