Inquiry questions continued:

• ‘Knowledge of central importance to providing services to clients is accorded low priority in higher education or omitted altogether.’ (Eraut 1994) This quote suggests that knowledge and talent alone will not make you a successful practitioner; you have to have a firm understanding of your professional practice. How has this course clarified my place within the practice and improved my understanding of it? At A-level should students be introduced to the concept of a professional practice? By doing this could it mean that the students became pigeon holed and their work stinted something that this inquiry is trying to prevent? The teaching of art at this stage is very different then the practice of art. I know that this is because the teachers have to follow a curriculum and the students have a set of assessment criteria that they have to meet making it hard to mimic the practice but it might help to give the students direction to know where the currently  stand within the practice.
• Eraut suggests that creating a map of professional knowledge will help to ‘illuminate the debate about theory- practice links and the role of experimental learning.’ This is one of the main areas that I want to explore in my investigation. How will I map my knowledge and define my knowledge base? Also could this technique be introduced to the students? Would it be beneficial for them? Last term i looked at learning cycles, could these ideas be incorporated to help to successfully map your knowledge?
• What am I hoping to achieve form this investigation? As previously mentioned one of my main focuses of the investigation will look at how using materials in an unconventional way and experimenting with techniques within my practice, the practice of other practitioners and to improve the teaching of the subject. Is this investigation valid? Is this investigation going to improve my work both as a practitioner and an art educator? Do my work colleagues and peers agree with this?