APPENDIX – Guidelines for co-discussants: To be a co-discussant and to give response at percentage seminars

To do research in artistic research is not only about developing one’s own dissertation project, but also about sharing and discussing others' work. In addition, it is about training as a respondent to enable the project be tested in the context of artistic research. Discussed below is what you should consider in the role of co-discussant, and then in your role as a respondent.

It may be important to keep in mind that the role of a co-discussant requires similar skills that you will acquire throughout developing your own thesis. Therefore, in order to critically discuss a project, you, like the one who presents the work, need to be able to apply the criteria required to form a dissertation project in artistic research. The theoretical perspectives and practical skills you have acquired through working on your dissertation project are thus the guidelines and the knowledge that you should employ in the role of co-discussant. As a co-discussant you should consider highlighting the project's benefits, as well as its shortcomings.

You should state the motivation of your critique, (both positive and negative). When claiming: "I think this works well / less well ..." follow with an explanation: "Because ...". This means, when constructing negative critique, you should emphasize presenting alternative solutions to problems, as well as discussing why and how these solutions could have improved. In short, you should be able to substantiate your reasoning with a demonstration of knowledge in artistic research. When opposing a project, you should be well prepared. Expect to study the material several times. You should be familiar with any work samples included, as well as from the literature referred to by the respondent. Make sure that source references, quotations and page references are correct.

As a co-discussant at a percentage seminar you have to relate to a work that is in process, but consider approaching the project by reflecting on some of the points below:

How can the relationship between the different parts of the project be described?
Are they linked? Are they loosely connected? Disparate? Discuss the pros and cons of the current structure and format.

Is there an outline to the project?
Can one easily orientate the work? Can you get an overview?

How do the different parts of the project relate to its overall purpose and questions?

Does the project have a clear purpose and clear questions? If yes, what are they? If no, can you, as a co-discussant, formulate what you perceive as the purpose of the project and what questions it generates?

Is the project contextualized?
How does the project contextualize aesthetic/ social/ political/ historical aspects? - and what artistic examples are included and / or missing?

What methods are used?
What artistic and scientific methods are used? Are multiple methods evident? Is the project interdisciplinary? Does the project span several artistic areas? Is it focusing on artistic process? Does it develop methods?

What are the artistic and theoretical starting points of the project?
Does the project have any specific artistic and theoretical starting points? How then, are they linked? Does it create art and / or theory?

Material
Does the project expire from any specific material in the form of texts or other objects? Does the project contain and / or build a variety of materials? Does the implementation of the project generate any own material and, if so, what?

Previous research
How does the project relate to previous research? Which research traditions does it relate to? Does the project appear to be introduced into the artistic research field?

Demarcation
How is the project defined, for example purpose, questions, method and material?

Research ethics
Does the project actively relate to ethical issues concerning research?

Relevance
What relevance can you see that the project has for artistic research?

Feasibility
Does the project appear to be feasible?

Literature, references, material, sources etc.
Is there enough information about the project's literature, references, materials, source documentation etc?