Brokering evaluations of partnerships in Australian community arts : responding to entrepreneurial tendencies

This article examines motivations and methods for external evaluators in taking on a brokerage relationship between artists, arts managers and governments (national and local) during an appraisal process of community arts events. The argument is situated in our experience evaluating the Creating Queensland programme, a multifaceted community arts programme presented as part of the one of Australia’s largest arts events the Brisbane Festival, in 2009 and 2010. We use this case to identify a number of principles and processes that may assist in establishing an effective evaluation process – defined, for us, as a process in which partners representing different elements of the community arts project can share information in a learning network, or an innovation network, that embraces the idea of continuous improvement. We explain that we, as consultants, are not necessarily the only participants in the evaluation process in a position to broker the decision making about what to research and report on. We argue that empowering each of the delivery partners to act as brokers, using the principles, protocols and processes to negotiate what should be researched, when, how and how it should be shared, is something each delivery partner can do. This can help create a common understanding that can reduce anxieties about using warts-and-all evaluation data to learn, grow and improve in the arts. It can, as a result, be beneficial both for the participating partners and the community arts sector as a whole.

Resistance is feral : digital culture, community arts, and the new cultural gatekeepers

The Community Arts sector in Australia has a history of resistance. It has challenged hegemonic culture through facilitating grassroots creative production, contesting notions of artistic processes, and the role of the artist in society. This paper examines this penchant for resistance through the lens of contemporary digital culture, to establish that the sector is continuing to challenge dominant forms of cultural control. It then proposes that this enthusiasm and activity lacks ethical direction, describing it as feral to encompass the potential of current practices, while highlighting how a level of taming is needed in order to develop ethical approaches.

Community arts and appropriate internet technology : participation, materiality, and the ethics of sustainability in the digitally networked era

This thesis delivers new knowledge about how Australian community arts practices of appropriate technology are shifting due to the internet. It reconfigures the sector's incumbent ethics of sustainability in response to emerging concerns about how the internet's material politics are affecting cultural participation.

Community arts in early childhood

Community arts can take many forms, including murals, installations, festivals and performances. The work can be produced by artists solely, by artists working with community groups, or by community groups. Community arts can be on a grand-scale covering whole streets, parks or even towns, or small- scale, such as a mosaic in the corner of a play area. It can be extremely impacting and a permanent fixture, or fragile and small and designed to blow away in the wind. But, common to all these different forms of community arts are the criteria that community arts are made in, for and/or by, the local community.

Community uses of co-creative media. Digital storytelling and Co-creative Media : The role of community arts and media in propagating and coordinating population-wide creative practice

This report describes a dynamic ‘Co-creative Media System’ that is emerging in the social space bounded by the following institutional pillars: • major cultural institutions (including screen culture agencies, libraries, museums, galleries and public service broadcasters) • the Community Arts and Cultural Development sector (historically supported through various programs of the Australia Council for the Arts) • the community broadcasting sector • the Indigenous media sector, and • the higher education sector. It illustrates how this system activates the immense creative potential of the Australian population through the ongoing development and application of participatory storytelling methods and media.

Community uses of co-creative media digital storytelling and co-creative Media: The role of community arts and media in propagating and coordinating population-wide creative practice

How is creative expression and communication extended among whole populations? What is the social and cultural value of this activity? What roles do formal agencies, community-based organisations and content producer networks play? Specifically, how do participatory media and arts projects and networks contribute to building this capacity in the contemporary communications environment? The latest issue of CSJ article in a special issue on “Broadening Digital Storytelling Horizons” edited by Burcu Simsek.

Large-scale community projects in regional Queensland : unlocking creative potential and community identity : Artspoken Queensland Regional Arts and Culture Conference 2011

In this presentation, renowned arts practitioner, Sean Mee, and Nigel Lavender, Executive Director of the Queensland Music Festival, talk about how community arts practice can be used to build cultural captial in communities, using examples such large-scale musicals such as The Road We're ON (Charleville) and Behind the Cand (Bowen), Mee and Lavender highlight the importance of community-driven narrative and particiaption.

Exploring university-community partnerships in arts-based service learning with Australian First Peoples and Arts Organizations

In this chapter we focus on the importance of partnerships in arts-based service learning with Australian First Peoples and community arts organizations. Drawing on six years of our own partnership and a wide body of literature, this chapter aims to act as a trigger for further reflection on ways to engage in meaningful partnerships with First Peoples and arts organizations. In particular, the continuum between transactional and transformational types of relationships provides a useful means for understanding our work and for positioning the various benefits and challenges associated with university-community partnerships more broadly.

Paving for diverse pathways : using industry-linked learning to support Performing Arts students in their transition to protean careers

Statistics presented in Australia Council reports such as Don’t Give Up Your Day Job (2003), and Artswork: A Report On Australians Working in the Arts 1 and 2 (1997, 2005), and in other studies on destinations for Performing Arts graduates, demonstrate the diversity of post-graduation pathways for our students, the prevalence of protean careers, and the challenges in developing a sense of professional identity in a context where a portfolio of work across performance making, producing, administration and teaching can make it difficult for young artists to establish career status and capital in conventional terms (cf. Dawn Bennett, “Academy and the Real World: Developing Realistic Notions of Career in the Performing Arts”, Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 8.3, 2009). In this panel, academics from around Australia will consider the ways in which Drama, Theatre and Performance Studies as a discipline is deploying a variety of practical, professional and work-integrated teaching and learning activities – including performance-making projects, industry projects, industry placements and student-initiated projects – to connect students with the networks, industries and professional pathways that will support their progression into their career. The panellists include Bree Hadley (Queensland University of Technology), Meredith Rogers (La Trobe University), Janys Hayes (Woolongong University) and Teresa Izzard (Curtin University). The panelists will present insights into the activities they have found successful, and address a range of questions, including: How do we introduce students to performance-making and / or producing models they will be able to employ in their future practice, particularly in light of the increasingly limited funds, time and resources available to support students’ participation in full-scale productions under the stewardship of professional artists?; How and when do we introduce students to industry networks?; How do we cater for graduates who will work as performers, writers, directors or administrators in the non-subsidised sector, the subsidised sector, community arts and education?; How do we category cater for graduates who will go on to pursue their work in a practice-as-research context in a Higher Degree?; How do we assist graduates in developing a professional identity? How do we assist graduates in developing physical, professional and personal resilience?; How do we retain our connections with graduates as part of their life-long learning?; Do practices and processes need to differ for city or regionally based / theoretically or practically based degree programs?; How do our teaching and learning activities align with emergent policy and industrial frameworks such as the shift to the “Producer Model” in Performing Arts funding, or the new mentorship, project, production and enterprise development opportunities under the Australia Council for the Arts’ new Opportunities for Young and Emerging Artists policy framework?

Visualising invisible networks as collaborative arts practice

This paper examines approaches to the visualisation of ‘invisible’ communications networks. It situates network visualisation as a critical design exercise, and explores how community artists might use such a practice to develop telematic art projects – works that use communications networks as their medium. The paper’s hypotheses are grounded in the Australian community media arts field, but could be applied to other collaborative contexts.

Creating Queensland, creative communities partnership - major Brisbane festival & Australia Council for the Arts

In March 2010, Brisbane Festival commissioned a Research Team, led by Dr Bree Hadley and Dr Sandra Gattenhof, Creative Industries Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, to conduct an evaluation of the Creating Queensland program, a new Creative Communities partnership between Brisbane Festival and the Australia Council for the Arts. This Final Report reviews and reports on the effectiveness of the program gathered during three phases throughout 2010: Phase 1, in which the research team analysed Brisbane Festival’s pre-existing data on the Creating Queensland events in 2009; Phase 2, in which the research team designed a new suite of instruments to gather data from producers, producing partners, artists and attendees involved in the Creating Queensland events in 2010; and Phase 3, in which the research team used content analysis of the narratives emerging in the data to establish how Brisbane Festival has adopted processes, activities or engagement protocols to operate as catalysts that produce experiences with specific impacts on individuals and communities. The Final Report finds that the Creating Queensland events concentrate on developing specific experiences for those involved – usually associated with storytelling, showcasing, and the valorisation or re-valorisation of neglected or forgotten cultural forms – in order to give communities a voice. It finds that the events prioritise accessibility – usually associated with allowing specific local communities or local artists to present material that is meaningful to them – and inclusivity – usually associated with using connections with producing partners (such as the Multicultural Development Association) to bring more and more people into the program. It finds that the events have a capacity-building effect, which allows local communities to increase their capacity to launch their own ideas, initiatives or events, allows individuals to increase their employability, or allows communities and individuals to increase their visibility within mainstream cultural practices and infrastructure. The Final Report further finds that Brisbane Festival has, throughout its years of commitment to community programming, developed specific techniques to enable events in the Creating Queensland program to have these effects, that these can be tracked, and, as a result, deployed or redeployed both by Brisbane Festival and other community arts organisations in the development of effective community arts programs. The data demonstrates that Creating Queensland is, by and large, having the desired effect on communities – people are actually participating, presenting work, and increasing their personal, professional and social skills in various ways, and this is valued by all stakeholders. The data also demonstrates that, as would be expected with any community arts program – particularly programs of this size and complexity – there are areas in which Creating Queensland is functioning exceptionally well and areas in which continuous improvement processes should be continued. Areas of excellence relate to Brisbane Festival’s longstanding commitment to community arts, and active community participation in the arts, as well as its ability to create well-known and loved programs that use effective techniques to have a positive impact on communities. Areas for improvement relate to Brisbane Festival’s potential to benefit from the following: clarifying relationships between community participants and professionals; increasing mentoring relationships between these groups; consolidating the discourses it uses to describe event aims across strategic, production, and publicity documents across the years; and re-considering the number of small events inside the larger Creating Queensland program.

Community media 2.0 : a report from the 'Co-Creative Communities' forum

Participatory digital culture presents major challenges to all traditional media outlets, but it presents very direct challenges to the community broadcast sector, which was established from the outset as local, community-driven and participatory. These and other issues were the focus of a recent forum at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image in Melbourne (Co-Creative Communities, 8–9 November 2012). The forum was part of a national research project, which has been exploring how Australian community arts and media organisations are responding to participatory digital culture, social media and user-led innovation. Focusing on the organisations who presented at the symposium, the paper examines how community-interest media is making the most of new and social media platforms. It considers examples of participatory digital media that have emerged from the community broadcast sector, but it also considers local, collaborative, community-interest media projects developed by public broadcasters and organisations involved in arts, social justice and development. Drawing on forum transcripts and follow-up research the essay describes some of the key trends shaping how community-interest media organisations and independent producers are working with participatory digital culture, and with what success.

Co-creating knowledge online : approaches for community artists

Forming peer alliances to share and build knowledge is an important aspect of community arts practice, and these co-creation processes are increasingly being mediated by the internet. This paper offers guidance for practitioners who are interested in better utilising the internet to connect, share, and make new knowledge. It argues that new approaches are required to foster the organising activities that underpin online co-creation, building from the premise that people have become increasingly networked as individuals rather than in groups (Rainie and Wellman 2012: 6), and that these new ways of connecting enable new modes of peer-to-peer production and exchange. This position advocates that practitioners move beyond situating the internet as a platform for dissemination and a tool for co-creating media, to embrace its knowledge collaboration potential. Drawing on a design experiment I developed to promote online knowledge co-creation, this paper suggests three development phases – developing connections, developing ideas, and developing agility – to ground six methods. They are: switching and routing, engaging in small trades of ideas with networked individuals; organising, co-ordinating networked individuals and their data; beta-release, offering ‘beta’ artifacts as knowledge trades; beta-testing, trialing and modifying other peoples ‘beta’ ideas; adapting, responding to technological disruption; and, reconfiguring, embracing opportunities offered by technological disruption. These approaches position knowledge co-creation as another capability of the community artist, along with co-creating art and media.