UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An arts-based methodology of intuition : secondary visual art teacher becomings and encounters with schooling Boulton-Funke, Adrienne 2015

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


24-ubc_2015_september_boultonfunke_adrienne.pdf [ 8.46MB ]
JSON: 24-1.0166628.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0166628-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0166628-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0166628-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0166628-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0166628-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0166628-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

	      AN ARTS-BASED METHODOLOGY OF INTUITION: SECONDARY VISUAL ART TEACHER BECOMINGS AND ENCOUNTERS WITH SCHOOLING by  Adrienne Boulton-Funke  M.A., The University of British Columbia 2009 B.Ed., The University of Saskatchewan 1994 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Curriculum Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) 	  August	  2015	  ©	  Adrienne	  Boulton-­‐Funke,	  2015	    	   	   ii	  Abstract 	  In this dissertation, I seek to understand how pedagogy and arts-based research might provoke the conditions for creative thought by drawing on experience as a sensory and affective event to disrupt perceptions and memory of teacher practice. I examine two secondary visual art teachers’ experiences of: (1) returning to their high schools and (2) filming their returns. Christen and Kelsie each returned twice, responding to prompts that I had provided: to explore the pedagogical value of school space, and to imagine the school as an installation designed to teach. The films, and the subsequent group dialogue sessions pointed the types of experiences that research and pedagogy might enact with teacher candidates to destabilize their tacit understandings of teacher practice. Through their filmmaking as art practice, Christen and Kelsie performed as nomads (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987) in the school space, which triggered unique memories in and of place. My research suggests that rather than filming events of significance—described by Dewey (1934) as an experience—which form the basis of teaching narratives (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990), both participants filmed the lesser events formed in the everyday mundane spaces of schooling, such as halls and stairways. In doing so, each participant developed an individuated aesthetic of becoming in their films, which, during the dialogue sessions, provoked a consideration of their perceptions of teacher practices in novel ways.   A significant implication of this research includes the emergence of an arts-based methodology of intuition to provoke alterity as a way of being in and of the world. Artistic practice and embodied experience offer new conceptualizations of time and experience that create the conditions for memory and perception to become amenable to change, and for intuition, as a disposition, to problematize, differentiate and temporalize experience. The methodology of intuition (Deleuze, 1991) develops intuition as an individual disposition to destabilize understandings gained through experience even as understanding of that experience is sought. I argue that the arts-based methodology of intuition holds significant potential for the ways in which both research and pedagogy might create opportunities for new perceptions of and capacities for visual art teacher practice.	  	   	   iii	  Preface  This dissertation is original and independent work by the author, Adrienne Boulton-Funke.  Publications and Pending publications from the work are listed below as is the information regarding Ethics Approval.  Publications	  Portions of the Prelude were published. Boulton-Funke, A. (2014). Narrative form and Yam Lau's Room: The encounter in arts based  research. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 15(17) 1-16. Portions of Chapter Five were published in 2014: Boulton-Funke, A. (2014). A critique and a proposal: A/r/tography and arts-based research as a  methodology of intuition. Visual Inquiry, 3(2), 207-221. Ethics	  This research was conducted with the approval of the UBC Behavioural Research Ethics Board (August 2, 2012) and was granted a Minimal Risk status. Project Title: Becoming and Film: Visual Art Teacher Candidates and Encounters with School Certificate # H12-01744 Funding	  This research was made possible through the generous funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) for "Film-based narrative research: a participatory methodology" (2011-2013). 	  	  	   	  	   	   iv	  Table of Contents Abstract	  ....................................................................................................................................................	  ii	  Preface	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  iii	  Table of Contents	  ..................................................................................................................................	  iv	  List of Figures	  ........................................................................................................................................	  vi	  Acknowledgements	  ..............................................................................................................................	  vii	  Dedication	  ...............................................................................................................................................	  ix	  Prelude	  ......................................................................................................................................................	  1	  Chapter 1: Introduction	  .....................................................................................................................	  11	  Introduction	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  11	  Research Questions	  ........................................................................................................................................	  13	  The Contemporary of Art in Research	  ......................................................................................................	  14	  Why the Return?	  ............................................................................................................................................	  19	  Schools	  as	  Ritualized	  and	  Territorialized	  Places	  ....................................................................................	  21	  Potentials	  of	  Cohesion	  and	  Normative	  Perception	  ................................................................................	  23	  The	  Mundane	  and	  the	  Everyday	  ........................................................................................................................	  30	  The	  Nomad	  and	  the	  Minoritarian:	  Art	  Practice	  and	  the	  Embodiment	  of	  the	  Everyday	  and	  Mundane	  Schooling	  ..................................................................................................................................................	  33	  Potentials of Post-Qualitative Research and Ontology	  ..........................................................................	  36	  Contemporary Art Practice, Ontology, and an Arts-Based Educational Research Methodology	  38	  Teacher Candidates: Perceptions and Expectations in Teacher Education and Practice	  .............	  42	  Chapter Summaries	  .......................................................................................................................................	  46	  Chapter 2: Christen and Kelsie’s films	  ...........................................................................................	  48	  Introduction	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  48	  The Film and Discussion of the Returns	  ...................................................................................................	  50	  Kelsie	  ................................................................................................................................................................................	  51	  Christen	  ...........................................................................................................................................................................	  65	  Conclusion	  ........................................................................................................................................................	  78	  Chapter 3: Deterritorializing Time: Encounter and Montage in Research and Pedagogy	  .	  80	  Introduction	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  80	  Potentials and Problems: Christen’s and Kelsie’s Films From and Through Experience	  .............	  82	  Designing	  the	  Prompts	  ...........................................................................................................................................	  82	  The	  Prompts	  and	  the	  Territorialization	  of	  Memory	  .............................................................................	  85	  Experiencing	  the	  Return	  ........................................................................................................................................	  87	  Recounting	  the	  Return:	  The	  Dialogue	  Sessions	  and	  the	  Production	  of	  Meaning	  ..................	  93	  Conclusion	  ......................................................................................................................................................	  101	  Chapter 4: Deterritorializing Experience: The Nomadic Inquiry of the Mundane, and the Present Absence	  .................................................................................................................................	  103	  Introduction	  ...................................................................................................................................................	  103	  Place and Pedagogy	  ......................................................................................................................................	  104	  The Experience of Space and Place in Christen’s and Kelsie’s Films	  ..............................................	  105	  Nomadic	  Inquiry	  of	  Place	  through	  Film	  .....................................................................................................	  106	  Transcendental	  Empiricism,	  Aesthetics	  and	  the	  Everyday	  of	  Schooling	  ................................	  111	  	   	   v	  The	  Mundane	  and	  the	  Everyday	  .....................................................................................................................	  113	  The	  Present	  Absence	  ............................................................................................................................................	  118	  Conclusion	  ......................................................................................................................................................	  125	  Chapter 5: The Deterritorialization of Qualitative Methodology and the Reterritorialization of an Arts-Based Methodology of Intuition	  ............................................	  127	  Introduction	  ...................................................................................................................................................	  127	  The Methodology of Intuition and the Potential of Encountering through Art	  .............................	  131	  Rule	  #1:	  The	  stating	  and	  creating	  of	  problems:	  Apply	  the	  test	  of	  true	  and	  false	  problems	  themselves.	  Condemn	  false	  problems	  and	  reconcile	  truth	  and	  creation	  at	  the	  level	  of	  problems.	  (Deleuze,	  1991,	  p.	  15)	  ...................................................................................................................	  134	  Rule	  #2:	  “Struggle	  against	  illusion,	  rediscover	  the	  true	  differences	  in	  kind	  or	  articulations	  of	  the	  real”	  (Deleuze,	  1991,	  p.	  21).	  ..................................................................................	  141	  Rule	  #3:	  “State	  problems	  and	  solve	  them	  in	  terms	  of	  time	  rather	  than	  of	  space.”	  (Deleuze,	  1991,	  p.	  31)	  ..........................................................................................................................................	  148	  Reterritorializations	  .....................................................................................................................................	  152	  Methodological Mappings	  ..........................................................................................................................	  154	  References	  ...........................................................................................................................................	  158	  Appendix	  .............................................................................................................................................	  177	     	   	   vi	  List of Figures Figure	  1:	  Still	  from	  Room	  by	  Yam	  Lau	  (2004)	  ...................................................................................................................................	  3	  Figure	  2:	  Beginning	  of	  Kelsie’s	  film	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  51	  Figure	  3:	  Kelsie’s	  hallway	  ........................................................................................................................................................................	  52	  Figure	  4:	  Kelsie’s	  hallway	  2	  .....................................................................................................................................................................	  53	  Figure	  5:	  Kelsie’s	  stairwell	  ......................................................................................................................................................................	  55	  Figure	  6:	  Exterior	  of	  Kelsie’s	  school	  ....................................................................................................................................................	  59	  Figure	  7:	  Exterior	  of	  Kelsie’s	  school	  2	  ................................................................................................................................................	  60	  Figure	  8:	  Kelsie’s	  second	  film:	  a	  conversation	  area	  ......................................................................................................................	  61	  Figure	  9:Christen’s	  interior	  stairwell	  .................................................................................................................................................	  65	  Figure	  10:	  Christen’s	  close-­‐up	  of	  stairs	  ..............................................................................................................................................	  67	  Figure	  11:	  Christen’s	  locker	  ....................................................................................................................................................................	  68	  Figure	  12:	  Christen’s	  art	  classroom	  .....................................................................................................................................................	  72	  Figure	  13:	  Edges	  of	  Christen’s	  painting	  under	  layers	  of	  paint	  .................................................................................................	  73	  Figure	  14:	  Christen’s	  English	  classroom	  ...........................................................................................................................................	  75	  Figure	  15:	  Stills	  from	  Christen’s	  and	  Kelsie’s	  schools,	  displayed	  in	  iMovie	  .....................................................................	  105	  Figure	  16:	  Encroaching	  on	  Kelsie	  .......................................................................................................................................................	  120	  Figure	  17:	  Still	  from	  Christen	  looking	  for	  the	  edges	  of	  her	  painting	  ...................................................................................	  123	  Figure	  18:	  Still	  from	  when	  Christen	  found	  her	  painting	  ..........................................................................................................	  124	    	   	   vii	  Acknowledgements    I would like to acknowledge the generous funding of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). I would also like to thank the faculty and staff at the University of British Columbia (UBC) who supported my learning, research and scholarship through their dedication and commitment to the entire learning community. Thank you Dr. Lisa Loutzenheiser, Dr. Graeme Chalmers, Dr. Taylor Webb, and Dr. Leslie Roman for your scholarship and teaching. An endless thank you, Dr. Rita Irwin, for the amazing opportunities you provided, including research assistantships, publications and presentations. Your mentorship, scholarship and friendship have been invaluable.   To Don MacDougall, my friend and fellow Deleuzian, thank you for your generosity of spirit and scholarship and for teaching me how to conference. Your work continues to impact the way I think, and I am so thankful for the all-too-short time we had together. To Natalie LeBlanc, thank you for our travels, conversations, presentations and, most importantly, friendship. I look forward to many years of working together and learning from you. To my participants, Christen and Kelsie, thank you for your generosity of time and spirit and for helping me to learn about the ways that art practice creates the opportunity to “see” the world in so many unique and wonderful ways.  I extend a sincere thank you to my committee members, Dr. Anne Phelan and Dr. Kit Grauer, and to my supervisor, Dr. Dónal O’Donoghue.  Anne, your work in our doctoral seminar class created the time and space for me to develop my understandings about teacher education and qualitative research. Your high standards and scholarship pushed me to think in so many different ways. Thank you for everything.  	   	   viii	   Kit, your influence on my work in graduate school, teaching and research is impossible to summarize here. I am truly appreciative and thankful for all the opportunities that you provided during my time at UBC. I have learned about developing community in the classroom, about how to thrive as a mother and woman in the academy and about how to have too much fun in the process. I cannot express what your mentorship, scholarship and friendship have meant to me.   Dónal, you have been my advisor since 2007, when I began my MA, and through your patience, scholarship, research, teaching and exceptional standards, I have been able to achieve things I would never have thought possible. You are generous with your time and scholarship, and I cannot begin to thank you enough for everything that you have done for me at UBC. To you, Andrea Scouten, Larae Ravenstein and Vanessa Goad, my friends outside of university—your love and support have made everything possible. To my family, thank you for your patience, love and support during this ride. Mom, Dad, Jeff and Shelly, you led by example through your commitment and passion for education. Geoff, this has not been an easy process, and I thank you for your support and for helping me recognize that I am stronger than I ever knew I could be.    	   	   ix	  Dedication 	   To Quinn and Nate.  Through you I continue to discover how to love, live, teach and learn. You are my heart. Thank you so much for your encouragement, love and support and for enthusiastically being a part of this event, even when it seemed as though it was not your choice. Your kindness, compassion, intelligence and sense of humour form beauty and passion in our lives together, and I only hope that one day you will understand how much being your mom has been and continues to be a privilege and an honour. I love you with all my heart. 	    	   	   1	  Prelude   As a PhD student teaching secondary visual art teacher candidates, I frequently used reflection and reflexivity as a pedagogical device for students to explore and critique the events that led them to teaching. I asked students to write, create artwork, and narrate their recollected path to becoming a teacher as a process to identify their assumptions and perceptions about teaching. Through these works, we explored their personal and practical views on teaching, which created opportunities to question their perceptions of practice. Teacher education very often presumes that what might be known about teacher practices is known and that the role of teacher education programs is not to create alternate understandings, but to induct teacher candidates into the profession by sustaining and perpetuating those practices that have been identified as beneficial (Britzman, 2003). These practices include pedagogical strategy development, curriculum planning, classroom management, and professional relationships with faculty, student and parents.  Britzman (2003) argues, “the structure of teacher education naturalizes the social organization of schooling . . . and this deflects attention from the assumptions that built the structure in the first place” (p. 38). As a teacher educator, I developed practices of reflection and reflexivity to destabilize this process of naturalization, yet I did not adequately consider the extent to which these processes created opportunities to disrupt perceptions rather than affirm understandings of teaching within the normative understandings of teaching and schooling. These concerns emerged through an encounter1 with research and pedagogy2 (O’Sullivan, 2006) 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1 An encounter is considered an experience that destabilizes knowledge through an affective shock to thought. 2 Pedagogy in this dissertation is described as the theory and practice of education, and more specifically, how learning is made possible. Britzman (2003) describes Freud’s assertion that teaching is an impossible profession, and only learning is possible. This learning is not achieved 	   	   2	  precipitated by Toronto artist Yam Lau’s film Room (2004). Lau’s film/CG animation created, for me, an encounter with narration and the research and pedagogical practices of narrative3 inquiry. It provoked a consideration of the potentialities of the encounter, in contemporary arts-based educational research methodologies as well as pedagogy, to disrupt tacit perceptions of teacher practices by disrupting the affirming nature of the linear narrative.   I first encountered Room in the Surrey Art Gallery while supervising my daughter’s grade one class field trip. An encounter (O’Sullivan, 2006) through art in this moment, despite being in a space intended for art, was unexpected given that my attention was focused on supervising 22 active six-year-olds. I sat with these children in a darkened screening room, and we watched as Lau’s film began with a minimalist, three-dimensional, virtual architectural framework of a room, rotating clockwise, emerging from a darkened space into light so that the activities of people within the room came into focus. In the lower right-hand corner, a video loop of two people played on what I later recognized as a TV within the interior room. As the room continued to rotate, further details began to unfold. I was able to view details of the material qualities of the space as well as Lau in the midst of being in the space.  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  by the transmission of knowledge from one to another, but through the implication of the self in learning. I suggest, as Deleuze (1994) does, that learning is not a peaceful or restful process but emerges, in some cases, when we are implicated or confronted with our own tacit and underlying assumptions. This confrontation—or violence, as Deleuze (1994) would argue—creates the potential for new thought.  Pedagogy in this dissertation looks to the potential and provocation of these conditions for new thought. 3 Please note that unless otherwise stated, the use of the terms narrative, narrative inquiry, and traditional narrative denote a particular form of narrative advanced by Connelly & Clandinin (1990), based on the concepts advocated by Dewey (1934) and Ricouer (1992). These works will be discussed in detail throughout this dissertation. 	   	   3	  	  Figure 1: Still from Room by Yam Lau (2004)  The work was created using a fixed camera to record four scenarios of Lau in his apartment; through computer graphics and animation, these played as a continuous disrupted narrative of the banality of everyday living. Room, Lau (2006) argued, functioned as a shorthand expression of the room in an attempt to complicate a series of representational footage. A second CGI virtual camera rotated counter clockwise to the image of the room, and we watch as Lau enters and turns on a light. Through sheer curtains, we see Lau change his jacket. He does not acknowledge the camera, suggesting a voyeuristic quality of watching without his permission, and I found that I was anticipating something, an Event4 or an experience5 that would point to 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4 The term Event is used in multiple ways in this work. The marker “Event” with an uppercase E denotes a link to Dewey’s (1934) an experience and Bennett’s (2012) discussion of historical events, particularly 9/11, which have been produced through reflection, narration, and discourse as Events that emerge as most significant. Deleuze, in multiple works, uses the concept of the event to articulate infinitive forms or becomings. These events are distinct from Bennett’s forms, 	   	   4	  the significance of the series of non-events playing. Shadows of his form and actions were cast in unexpected places, including the immediate foreground of the film, disrupting the position of his presence in a particular area of the room. As he continued to remove his jacket, a second image of the same room appears as a layer behind the first, yet the sameness is disrupted because of the position, angle, and perspective of the shot. As the camera rounds a corner, the apparatus of the architectural elements part, and we are able to see the interior of the room as a cube that is empty, despite the image of the contents and actions within the room remaining projected on the panels of the cube.   At this point, we see multiple “Laus” removing their shirts, while another appears to be lying in bed, looking towards the foot of the bed outside of the shot. The disrobing continues as a progressive and multiplying composition of moving images of Lau. We see Lau put on pajamas and get into bed, despite having seen him already in bed only moments before. He reaches over and turns out the light moments before a second projection of the same activity also turns out the light, and the work returns to its architectural structure and the glowing television until it dissolves into darkness. During the viewing in the gallery space, my attention was drawn to understanding the story as an interpretation of Lau’s meaning. When that story became something other than expected, my attention shifted to the details of the work, and I began to attend to the mundane qualities of his everyday. My expectations and assumptions were set aside as I became attuned to the performance of the everyday and to my own discomfort at the lack of a traditional narrative form.  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  as the Deleuzian event is a process of difference rather than a historical event marked and situated in time. 5 An experience (Dewey, 1943) is an event that, upon reflection, emerges as being so significant that it organizes all prior experiences as contributing to its emergence. It is an object of reflection and serves as the conceptual framework for the narrative form pursued by Ricouer (1992) and Connelly and Clandinin (1990) in narrative identity and inquiry. 	   	   5	   While I became invested in exploring the connections that emerged, and as my expectations of a traditional narrative became something else, the docent who guided the students I was supervising moved the children out of the room without discussion. The exhibit that housed Room also included more representational works that depicted processes and products of domesticity. Children were seated in front of sculptures of homes and neighborhoods, as the docent asked them to compare and contrast the displays with their own homes. The narratives of advancing urbanization were discussed with the students and after a short explanation of these works, the children were moved to the craft room to make versions of their own houses out of clay. In this work of representation, the children simply confirmed their own perception of what homes and neighborhoods meant, recognizing their own models of domesticity but leaving their perceptions about domesticity intact.  While traditional narrative form attends to a linear and consecutive experience of time to develop unity, the arts-based encounter is concerned with what I would argue is best understood through Giles Deleuze’s (1991) concept of duration. Duration is a non-linear, psychical experience of time, a dynamic process that contracts to draw the virtual6, as past recollections and memories and future desires, into the present moment, rendering them amenable to change. In duration, a process of becoming displaces the conception of the self as a fixed and knowable object. The encounter is formed in the experience of affective shock, where particular meanings 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6 Boundas (2005) argues that the Deleuzian virtual is constituted by incorporeal events as a pure past that can never be fully present. These non-material events may provoke an actualization yet are not didactic or predictive. Deleuze’s (1991) work with Bergson suggests that the virtual, while not interchangeable with duration, is intrinsically linked to the temporalization of experience and thus to Deleuze’s (1994) thesis on difference. The virtual as the immaterial belonging to the past and never fully present suggests a perpetual state of revision and differentiation.  This virtual is then also key to understanding not only difference, but also becoming as non-deterministic. Throughout this dissertation, the virtual is described as memory, recollections and perception.  It should be noted that the virtual reflects a more complex concept described in this footnote. 	   	   6	  are suspended as the body responds to sensorial stimuli, which may provoke a disruption to perceptions. In these moments, the body becomes entangled in the material and expressive qualities of a temporal assemblage, destabilizing the authority of a recollected narrative and a fixed identity. At play is the experience itself and the implications for destabilizing rather than sustaining tacit thought. Tamboukou (2008b) argued: what is not actualized or expressed in a [traditional] narrative form, the virtual, the silenced, the non-said, still inheres in what has been said, expressed or articulated, creating within the narrative itself a depository of forces that can take it elsewhere, divert it from its initial aim or meaning, create bifurcations, sudden and unexpected changes, discontinuities and ruptures in the sequential structure. (p. 284)  The encounter that I experienced created a disruption in my expectations of a linear narrative, and through multiple creative processes—including my own filmmaking and research—formed the conditions for my new thoughts related to research and pedagogy, which continue to unfold. My encounter with Room was shaped by the denial of my expectation of a typical narrative, and the eventual suspension of processes of interpretation. What happened instead was a shift in my attention to the fractured and incomplete documentation of a mundane moment in Yam Lau’s life. The questions that formed as I viewed the work were initially interpretative in nature, including: What was I supposed to be looking at or for? What was important that I was somehow missing? What did this work mean? My use of questions of interpretation as a hermeneutic tracing of meaning was perpetuated by my assumptions and perceptions of the use of a traditional narrative form within film.  	   	   7	   As the film looped back on itself, I attended to the performance and to my affective response that I now call uncertainty, which created an opportunity to encounter film and narrative for their potential to unsettle and disrupt the expected, anticipated, and unified. The resistance found in uncertainty gave way to inquiry. In the three-minute loop, I mapped connections to Lau’s work, the everyday, my research interests, and how attending to this uncertainty might draw attention to multiple narratives of being, knowing, and experiencing in a non-linear, non-progressive way. In its simultaneous recognizable but unrecognizable form, Room created an opportunity for me to think differently about the ways in which a narrative shapes and is shaped by the practices of place.   Sheerin (2009) asked, “What happens if we no longer seek the self in recognition and the same, in idem, in what is banal in the person, in what is recognized to have repeated itself in tedious habit?” (p. 72). To seek the selves outside of recognition, Yam Lau’s Room explored the banality of the everyday, the tedious habit, and that, which repeats itself, by disrupting the concept of sameness and repetition in difference. Drawing on Deleuze’s (1991) notion of the virtual as memories and perceptions drawn into the actualization from the virtual as pure difference and difference in-itself, the Nietzschean concept of the Eternal Return is significantly relevant to Lau’s work, as it considers the repetition of daily living in both place and time, while visually disrupting the narrative of sameness. Deleuze (1990) explored this idea of the Eternal Return as the return of difference in and of itself, rather than the return of sameness. Difference for Deleuze (1994) does not refer back to an original to offer an expression of incremental difference; rather he looks to the eternal return as a fundamental process intrinsic to becoming.  In doing so, the Eternal Return offers a way to explore how difference provokes the disunity of becoming rather than the unity of a fixed identity. Ricoeur’s (1992) thesis of sameness in the 	   	   8	  narrative identity melds two disparate forms of identity, idem-sameness and ipse-selfhood, into the conception of character as that which remains consistent throughout the narrative. Deleuze (1994), though, suggested that difference, not sameness, is produced in this moment, and that it is the affective that differentiates the self in relational acts, moving away from fixed identities—or, in this case, creating the opportunity to explore representation and recognition as forming perceptions and conceptions of identity.   In Lau’s work, the fractured nature of the repetitive acts of living reveals material and expressive differences, projected onto the exterior of an empty cube, which drew attention to the ways that meaning is attached to particular acts versus the acts containing an inherent meaning themselves. Lau’s work draws on familiar places and the familiar performance of routines while adding visual dimensions that disrupt the representative form of the narrative of experience, with “acts of ordinariness elevated to that of the almost extraordinary as the hyper-cubed dwelling shifts and un/folds itself” (Nguyen, n.d.).   Through Room, I considered the ways in which representation and traditional narrative form function as acts of territorialization in that they create a consistency, and this consistency creates borders distinguishing itself from other territories. Deleuze and Guattari (1987) argued that the act of interpreting experience requires a tracing of past connections and in doing so sustains normative and habitual ways of knowing. They asserted that the concept of mapping is a generative process in that it forms connections and expands the territory, and in some instances forms ruptures and a line of flight, destabilizing the consistency of the territory. Connections made in this process form new assemblages as points of singularity, which allow alternate and different understandings to emerge. 	   	   9	   The encounter, described by O’Sullivan (2006), produces points of rupture where new connections must form. The event of this rupture expresses the concept of identity as a becoming, as a process that continues to form new and generative connections. My encounter with research and pedagogy formed multiple connections and allowed the event of this research to emerge in unexpected and untimely ways. O’Sullivan (2006) suggested that non-representational contemporary art works create the possibility of thought, as we engage in an “experience oriented against an overemphasis on signifying régimes, but also against habit and opinion” (p. 6). For O’Sullivan (2006), art that resists representation then draws on affect to create opportunities to delay reductive forms of interpretation, allowing other ways to know differently. This suggests a neo-aesthetic that presents a “claim for a materialist aesthetic, premised on the affect and sensation, where subjectivity is rendered subjectless” (Kennedy, 2004, p. 17). In this durational event, affect intercedes with the virtual recollections and memories that form perception, disrupting our normalized perceptions and desires. O’Sullivan (2006) argued, via Bergson, that we are caught, as beings in the world, on a certain spatiotemporal register: we “see” only what we have already seen. We see only that which we are interested in. At stake with art might be an altering—a switching—of this register. (p. 47) It is this type of experience that is put to work in my research so that I might understand the conditions, which allow a disruption to signifying regimes of teacher practice, as well as habit and opinion, and how these experiences might emerge through art practice and various types of experiences in research and pedagogy. These understandings have significant implications for developing conditions and experiences that provoke new ideas and thoughts in entrenched ways of knowing about research and teacher practices. Such insights may have significant implications 	   	   10	  for the types of experiences, as thought experiments, that we create in teacher education classes and in research, and the conditions for alterity to emerge. How might an artistic encounter and practice offer ways to otherwise narrate experience, to disrupt rather than affirm normative understandings of teacher practice?    	   	   11	  	  Chapter 1: Introduction  Introduction 	   The	  Prelude	  to	  this	  dissertation	  narrates	  a	  particular	  experience	  that	  I	  suggest	  performed	  what	  O’Sullivan	  (2006)	  describes	  as	  an	  encounter	  or	  an	  event	  as	  becoming;	  such	  encounters	  offer	  significant	  potential	  for	  research	  and	  pedagogy	  in	  teacher	  education	  that	  aims	  to	  disrupt	  normative	  understandings	  and	  perceptions	  of	  teacher	  practices.	  This	  disruption	  does	  not	  suggest	  that	  the	  aim	  of	  teacher	  education	  should	  necessarily	  be	  to	  supplant	  one	  form	  of	  teaching	  for	  another;	  instead,	  it	  points	  to	  creating	  the	  opportunities	  for	  teacher	  candidates	  to	  perhaps	  question	  or	  challenge	  normative	  perceptions	  of	  teaching	  that	  have	  formed	  through	  tacit	  and	  systemic	  schooling	  practices	  during	  their	  own	  K-­‐12	  education.	  Drawing	  on	  Deleuze’s	  (1994)	  argument	  that	  “[s]omething	  in	  the	  world	  forces	  us	  to	  think.	  This	  something	  is	  an	  object	  not	  of	  recognition	  but	  of	  a	  fundamental	  encounter”	  (p.	  139),	  O’Sullivan	  argues:	  An	  object	  of	  an	  encounter	  is	  fundamentally	  different	  from	  an	  object	  of	  recognition.	  With	  the	  latter	  our	  knowledges,	  beliefs	  and	  values	  are	  reconfirmed.	  We,	  and	  the	  world	  we	  inhabit,	  are	  reconfirmed	  as	  that	  which	  we	  already	  understood	  our	  world	  and	  ourselves	  to	  be.	  An	  object	  of	  recognition	  is	  then	  precisely	  a	  representation	  of	  something	  always	  already	  in	  place.	  (2006,	  p.	  1)	  For	  O’Sullivan,	  the	  encounter	  draws	  on	  affect	  as	  a	  physiological	  response	  that	  precedes	  the	  mediated	  processes	  of	  language.	  This	  pre-­‐cognitive	  sensorial	  process	  is	  produced	  through	  experience	  that	  neither	  affirms	  nor	  sustains	  normative	  understandings	  and	  emerges	  	   	   12	  momentarily	  outside	  of	  discourse,	  offering	  a	  unique	  and	  temporal	  opportunity	  for	  the	  production	  of	  difference	  as	  new	  and	  creative	  thought.	  Throughout	  this	  dissertation,	  I	  argue	  that	  the	  artistic	  encounter	  and	  affective	  intensity	  hold	  significant	  potential	  for	  the	  how	  both	  research	  and	  pedagogy	  might	  create	  opportunities	  for	  new	  perceptions	  of,	  and	  perhaps	  practices	  for,	  visual-­‐art	  teacher	  practice.	  My	  experience	  with	  Room,	  as	  an	  encounter,	  disrupted	  my	  perceptions	  of	  research	  and	  pedagogical	  practices	  and	  provoked	  my	  reconsideration	  of	  practices	  associated	  with	  each.	  This	  provocation	  emerged	  as	  it	  did	  for	  me	  while	  I	  was	  in	  the	  beginning	  stages	  of	  research	  for	  my	  PhD	  dissertation,	  while	  teaching	  secondary	  visual-­‐art	  teacher	  candidates.	  I	  was	  also	  in	  the	  early	  stages	  of	  working	  through	  concepts	  in	  the	  writings	  of	  Deleuze,	  Deleuze	  and	  Guattari,	  and	  post-­‐qualitative	  theorists,	  including	  Maggie	  MacLure,	  Elizabeth	  St.	  Pierre	  and	  Lisa	  Mazzei,	  and	  contemporary	  art	  theorists	  and	  philosophers	  Jill	  Bennett,	  Elizabeth	  Grosz	  and	  Simon	  O’Sullivan,	  and	  so	  these	  works	  are	  significant	  to	  understandings	  that	  emerged	  during	  the	  research.	  Specifically,	  these	  works	  broadly	  call	  for	  an	  ontological	  shift	  in	  research,	  pedagogy	  and	  art	  practice—a	  shift	  that	  I	  was	  unable	  to	  think	  without	  first	  disarticulating	  my	  own	  beliefs	  and	  perceptions.	  Arguably,	  my	  experience	  with	  Room	  was	  highly	  individuated,	  as	  I	  drew	  my	  apprehension	  of	  the	  unmet	  expectations	  of	  the	  narrative	  form	  into	  the	  present	  of	  my	  work	  and	  research.	  The	  confluence	  of	  these	  and	  other	  forces,	  sparked	  my	  curiosity	  through	  the	  potential	  of	  post-­‐qualitative	  understandings	  of	  ontology	  and	  Deleuze	  and	  Guattari’s	  concepts.	  These	  concepts	  including	  becoming,	  duration	  and	  intuition	  reposition	  the	  ontological	  as	  an	  imperative	  in	  research	  and	  pedagogy.	  To	  think	  and	  explore	  the	  potential	  of	  the	  ontological	  shift	  alongside	  my	  experience	  with	  Room,	  I	  considered:	  What	  might	  I	  need	  to	  do	  differently	  in	  research	  and	  pedagogy?	  What	  might	  I	  need	  to	  conceptualize	  	   	   13	  differently?	  What	  might	  happen	  to	  my	  understandings	  of	  research	  and	  pedagogy	  in	  teacher	  education,	  and	  what	  will	  I	  then	  perhaps	  know	  and	  do	  differently,	  if	  anything	  at	  all?	  What	  potential	  might	  be	  created,	  amidst	  the	  teacher	  candidates’	  immersion	  in	  an	  intensive	  one-­‐year	  education	  program,	  to	  develop	  opportunities	  for	  teacher	  candidates	  to	  encounter	  their	  own	  perceptions	  of	  teacher	  practice?	  In	  this	  confluence,	  my	  research	  became	  a	  methodological	  experiment	  with	  pedagogical	  implications	  for	  pre-­‐service	  art-­‐teacher	  education.	  During	  this	  experiment,	  a	  number	  of	  methodological	  and	  pedagogical	  practices	  were	  deterritorialized	  (Deleuze	  &	  Guattari,	  1987)	  to	  reimagine	  humanist	  aspects	  inherent	  in	  qualitative	  research	  methodologies	  (St.	  Pierre,	  2013)	  and	  arts-­‐based	  research	  methodologies	  (jagodzinski	  &	  Wallin,	  2013),	  in	  order	  to	  think	  research	  and	  pedagogy	  as	  ontology,	  as	  an	  event,	  a	  becoming	  (Deleuze	  &	  Guattari,	  1987).	  St.	  Pierre	  (2013)	  argues	  while	  ontology	  has	  been	  present	  in	  “post”	  forms	  of	  scholarship	  for	  many	  years,	  only	  more	  recently	  have	  these	  understandings	  been	  put	  to	  work	  in	  research.	  Developed	  through	  the	  following	  questions,	  it	  is	  this	  work	  that	  my	  research	  takes	  up	  to	  understand	  the	  implications	  for	  teacher	  education	  and	  research.	  Research Questions 	  	   To	  pursue	  this	  methodological	  experiment,	  three	  research	  questions	  were	  formulated,	  although	  many	  more	  emerged	  throughout	  the	  research	  process:	  In	  what	  ways	  might	  film-­‐based,	  rhizomatic	  research,	  which	  has	  the	  potential	  to	  activate	  an	  “encounter”	  (O’Sullivan,	  2006),	  create	  opportunities	  for	  a	  disruption	  to	  teacher	  candidates’	  perceptions	  of	  teacher	  practice?	  	  	   	   14	  How	  do	  teacher	  candidates	  respond	  to,	  make	  sense	  of	  and	  narrate	  their	  return	  to	  their	  former	  K-­‐12	  educational	  spaces?	  What	  might	  be	  understood	  about	  film-­‐based,	  rhizomatic	  research	  and	  teacher	  becoming	  through	  an	  analytical	  process	  that	  requires	  participants’	  mapping	  of	  the	  rhizomatic	  connections	  activated	  by	  narration,	  participation,	  film	  and	  the	  materiality	  of	  schooling?	  The Contemporary of Art in Research 	   To pursue these questions, I designed a provocation with multiple parts for two secondary visual art teacher candidates, Christen and Kelsie, to return7 to their high schools on two occasions, respond to a prompt on each occasion and create a film for each of their returns. Both Christen and Kelsie identified themselves as practicing artists interested in film and photography, although Christen preferred photography and Kelsie preferred film. Following each return, Christen and Kelsie met with me, and we viewed and discussed the films they had produced, their experiences of the return, their understandings of their experience as high school students, and their aesthetic choices rendered in their films. Understandings about the particular types of experiences, which emerged from these films and discussions while viewing their films, emerged, continued to unsettle my perceptions of research and pedagogy. Attending to this unsettlement created the opportunity to further develop insights into alternate concepts, frameworks and practices with implications for arts-based research and pedagogy for teacher education. Rather than exploring and solving a particular problem, my research emerged in the 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  7 The concept of return is discussed throughout this chapter by examining Deleuze’s concept of duration. This is done to explore the materiality of the return as well as the virtual qualities of how memory and recollections are experienced through re-understandings of past, present and future. I further consider the pedagogical returns that are created in teacher education programs, those being the practicum or student teaching, and the return to memories of schooling through reflection and reflexivity.  	   	   15	  potential to explore ontological commitments to better understand the conditions for both research and pedagogy to encounter rather than represent knowledge. As a condition for new thought, the encounter (O’Sullivan, 2006) draws on the distinction of contemporary art practice as a type of experience rather than a specific time period, media or medium of art. Zepke and O’Sullivan (2010) have argued: “Contemporary art constitutes a new ‘expanded field’ that utilizes and critiques the sensations produced by cognitive ‘immaterial labour’,” (pp. 5–6) working within and perhaps eroding the distinction between art and life. The potential of the experience of the return, and Christen and Kelsie’s filmmaking, draws on this understanding of contemporary art practice, as [c]ontemporary art might indeed involve itself in critique, the critique of representation or of that apparatus of capture that feeds off creativity (deconstructive strategies/ideological critique), but it can also plug into the creativity and fundamental productivity in and of the world that is ontologically prior to this capture. (O’Sullivan, 2010, p. 194) For O’Sullivan and those working with the writings of Deleuze and of Deleuze and Guattari, the draw of the potential for the new, and immanence as ontology of difference, rather than social and political critique or the representation of truth, distinguishes the contemporary period from others. This distinction does not imply a linear, historical trajectory towards the contemporary, or a claim that this contemporary is ahistorical. Rather, the contemporary of art suggests a mode of engagement or a work of art aligned with aisthesis (Rancière, 2013). This, as Bennett (2012) argues, “inclines not only towards the judgement of art—which has proved its predominant concern—but also toward a more general theory of sensory-emotional experience, potentially crossing into psychology and social science” (p. 3). Bennett (2005), Garoian (2013), Grosz 	   	   16	  (2004), Massumi (2002), O’Sullivan (2006) and O’ Sullivan and Zepke (2010) draw on this ontology as underpinning the works of those creating in the contemporary, rather than pointing to specific types of art, such as installation, performance, painting and sculpture, or specific historical periods, as specifically contemporary. Arguably, works bracketed in particular historical periods—including Modernism, for example—may be re-encountered as contemporary. Art may allow for a re-inhabiting the historical moment of production as the encounter, re-makes and de-contextualizes, pointing to the temporal and constructed nature of the meaning produced in and through the work of art. As Zepke (2010) argues, “the ‘contemporary’ is an ontological rather than chronological term, marking the emergence of something new as the construction and expression of being in becoming” (p. 63).  At the onset of the research design, I began to consider what types of experiences might be activated in research. I looked to the types of returns utilized in teacher education, primarily the return to school, designed through student teaching and practicum experiences. I also consider the return to the experience of schooling through the processes of reflection that are often engaged in teacher education. I began to consider Christen and Kelsie’s return through their art practices and to ponder what the implications for research methodologies and teacher education might be. While I explored this event, the research unfolded as an encounter with my own perceptions of research and pedagogy as the event of my own learning in and through creative research acts (Garoian, 2013). In this encounter, I looked to contemporary arts’ potential to take up the work of the ontological in educational research, to ask different types of questions, to provoke alternate experiences and to reconfigure time in the pursuit of creative thought.   As an arts-based methodology, my research drew on the aforementioned understandings of the contemporary of art and theories of aesthetics, as well as Christen and Kelsie’s 	   	   17	  backgrounds as artists, photographers and filmmakers, along with their films, to offer unique insights into educational phenomena, including school spaces and teacher practices. I also drew on the conceptualization of the schools Christen and Kelsie returned to as forms of installation art. I designed two prompts for Christen and Kelsie to think with in their return. The first asked them to consider the pedagogical value of the school space, and the second asked them to encounter the school as a form of installation art. Drawing on the work of Bishop (2005), O’Donoghue (2010) argues that installation art plays on the ambiguity and duality of the viewer who moves through the work, and on the way the installation structures the form of encounter with space. He argues further that classroom spaces play on this ambiguity, as “similar to art installations, classrooms are immersive spaces to be entered into, but are constructed with a particular purpose in mind; they are to be experienced in particular ways” (p. 402).  Drawing on geophysical concepts, Deleuze and Guattari (1987) argue that territories form their distinct borders through particular practices and movements within the territories. These forms of experience within a territory establish, sustain and perpetuate normative practices that create and strengthen distinctions between territories. Movement thus becomes territorialized as it becomes striated8 (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987) and organized within normative understandings. While the prompts may suggest a form of striation and perhaps a precondition of 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  8 Deleuze and Guattari (1087) make the distinction between striated spaces and smooth spaces by examining the game of chess as striated and a game of Go as smooth. They describe chess as highly structured, with movement that codes and decodes space according to rules and strategies, while in Go, movement is not “from one point to another but becomes perpetual, without aim or destination without departure or arrival” (p. 353). The movement of the pieces in Go follows a set of simplified rules, but these rules are modified based on the game at hand.  As a result of momentary modifications, the game has no set ending and within the game, alternate strategies may be employed creating minoritarian or nomadic opportunities for individuation. Similar to the movement in Go, the nomad moves through smooth spaces without being shaped by known possibilities for navigation but through alternate and diffuse potentialities for movement that offer alternate understandings, disrupting dominant discourses. 	   	   18	  participants’ films, it was my intention to utilize the lack of specificity in the language of the prompts to shift the tendency of the participants away from a form of narration of their experience of schooling as focusing on an experience (Dewey, 1934). I designed the prompts to provoke an alternate and perhaps abstracted experience with a familiar space. While my intention was to enable alternate forms of inquiry of the school space that resisted the narration of significant events, as discussed in later chapters, the prompts participated in several unanticipated types of engagement with memory and the school spaces. If school spaces are, as O’Donoghue (2010) argues, immersive spaces with a particular purpose, to be experienced in particular ways, what new understandings might emerge if those experiences as movement inside the territory of the school space are disrupted through filming as a form of art practice? What new understandings might emerge if the school space as a territory is explored as such, but not through the perceptions of a “teacher,” “student” or “teacher candidate” but of an artist exploring affective sensorial memories of place?   In the next sections of this chapter, I elaborate on research and scholarship pertaining to the types of returns designed for teacher candidates as part of their teacher education programs and as part of their entry into the field of teaching visual art. I also examine post-qualitative forms of research, as well as research related to teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice, to develop my assertion that certain experiences and practices in research and pedagogy sustain rather than disrupt perceptions. I explore the historical trajectory and emergence of the ontological imperative identified by both post-qualitative researchers and contemporary art theorists. I examine post-qualitative aims to disarticulate lingering humanist and positivistic tendencies in research, which rely on epistemological initiatives and identity politics. I also provide a chapter overview of the additional four chapters of this dissertation. 	   	   19	  Why the Return? 	   The design of many teacher education programs brings teacher candidates into the fold of the teaching discipline through a number of practices, including the physical return to school through practicum (Unrath & Daria, 2009) and the cognitive return to school through reflection and reflexivity. The practicum, as Britzman (2003, 2009) has argued, functions as a process of sameness by shaping teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice through the performance of the practicality of the everyday and common sense approaches to teaching. The commonsensical approach to teaching is made up of a number of practices that are underpinned by conceptions of curriculum, pedagogy, the role of teachers, the role of students, the functions and purposes of schooling, desires for products of schooling, the role of the school in society and so on.   These commonsensical approaches simultaneously are rationalized by and rationalize the existence and purposes of schooling. In keeping with the profession of teaching, practicum serves to further distinguish teacher candidates as teachers by moulding their movements and performance of teacher as distinct from students. This process includes guidance and instruction on where they stand, how to speak, how to dress, where to look, and where it is or is not appropriate to be in the school space. In doing so, the performance of the normative teaching identity striates the school space, directing the student teacher’s capacities to remain within normative conceptions and performances of teaching identity. This performance produces the school space as a rendering of commonsensical approaches, which further affirm and reify perceptions of what constitute effective teacher practices.  A second form of return emerges in teacher education curriculum and pedagogy as teacher candidates reflect on and narrate their stories of experience in order to understand their reasons for teaching and their perceptions of practice. The works of Clandinin and Connelly 	   	   20	  (1987, 1990, 2000), underpinned by Dewey’s (1934) work on experience, have been highly influential in conceptualizing the pedagogical value of this return. According to Willinsky (1989), the works of Connelly and Clandinin help bridge the gap between teacher beliefs and teacher practice by emphasising a model wherein the teacher and teacher candidate might learn from experience in order to improve practices.  In this section, I explore these two forms of return to consider how the return to school through art practice might create the conditions for new and creative thought in teacher candidates’ perceptions of teacher practice. I suggest that the returns that have typically been made available to teacher candidates, including the practicum and reflection, may do more to affirm rather than disrupt perceptions of practice. I also suggest that the ways in which we learn from rather than through experience conditions our potential understandings of teaching experience, thereby sustaining tacit and normative understandings of schooling and teacher practice. I propose instead that the return to school through artistic practice might engage in the practices of the minoritarian (Deleuze & Guattari, 1986) and the nomad (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987), which enable an exploration of school as a site for disrupting normative perceptions of teacher practice. These practices are not intended as a dismissal of the types of experiences created in teacher education, but are developed here to consider the potential for artistic practices as alternate forms of experience in the return to school that might create the conditions for non-majoritarian perceptions of teacher practices to emerge.  In the following section, I examine how educational scholars have considered the types of experiences and practices that stabilize and territorialize school spaces. These practices form and are formed by dominant and normalized discourses of schooling, limiting the potential of those in the schools—including teachers, teacher candidates and students—to create alternate forms of 	   	   21	  engagement with the school space and practices. I then consider how the returns to school designed in many teacher-education programs may not create opportunities to disrupt these practices.  Schools as Ritualized and Territorialized Places 	   Significant scholarship on the practices associated with schools as a ritualized performance suggests that the everyday, tacit repetition of practices of those involved in schooling, including students and teachers, normalizes particular knowledge and behaviours (Eisner, 1976; Fine, 1991; O’Donoghue, 2007; McLaren, 1988, Willis, 1977). For teachers, students and teacher candidates, this suggests a limited repertoire of performances of identities including the expected and normative behaviours of teachers, teacher candidates and students within school spaces. Britzman (2003) argues that for teachers and teacher candidates, the individual is separate from the caricature of a teacher, discursively produced from stereotypical images of teaching. The tacit performance of these identities forms and perpetuates normalized perceptions of what is both possible and approved in the school space. This tacit nature resists forms of critical reflection, perpetuating commonsensical and normal practices and perceptions of teacher practices.  The concepts of the null (Apple, 1971) and hidden (Eisner, 1976) curriculum suggest that rather than via the overt and explicit curriculum, the communication of dominant and normalized understandings occurs through the school organization and structures, including the bell structures, the disciplining of knowledge into discreet subject areas, and the hierarchical power structures. The hidden curriculum in schools, imposed on students, provides, “differing learning contexts . . . closely associated with the racial, sexual, and class characteristics of the student body” (Bowles & Gintis, 1975, p. 79). This reproductive nature of schools suggests that social 	   	   22	  classes form in successive generations (Willis, 1977). These normalized perceptions and performances of a teaching identity within hidden and null curricula suggest how teacher candidates both form and perhaps continue to reify their perceptions of teaching during their own K-12 educational experience. McLaren (1988) argued, though, that classroom culture does not manifest itself in a disembodied fashion; rather, students and teachers “struggle over the interpretations of ritual performances and symbolic meanings, and where symbols have both centripetal and centrifugal pulls” (p. 164). The meanings of these performances are neither neutral nor fixed, but may be shaped in a number of ways.   Ellsworth (2005) argued that to reimagine schooling, we might look to alternate places of pedagogy, including museums and memorials, to explore the ways that learning occurs in and through the materiality of place. In many of these sites, architectural configurations displace time and space through sensorial force and, in doing so, disrupt understandings of “insider” and “outsider”; consequently, the potential for new thought is found in the performance of a particular place, without a particular identity shaping the ways that knowing and knowledge might form. She delineated the structures of Holocaust museums wherein a viewer described being put in motion “both physically and cognitively in ways that make it impossible to ever settle into a position that would place him either inside or outside the Holocaust” (p. 52). She explored the potential to reimagine the pedagogy of schools through museums and memorials, as they are unencumbered with the discursive production of schools, teachers and students, and they thereby create the potential for new understandings outside of the discourse of schooling.  Unlike Ellsworth (2005), I suggest that schools may offer rich sites for a disruption to perceptions of teaching, but that perhaps the ways in which we have asked student teachers to return to schools—including student teaching and the practicum, and the processes of reflexivity 	   	   23	  and narrative work—create a limited possibility to think and perform teaching practices. I also suggest that the ways in which we create conditions for alternate understandings and new potentials significantly shape how creative thought may or may not unfold, and that the experiences we design may provoke new thought or may sustain normative perceptions of teacher practice in both research and pedagogy. I agree with Ellsworth (2005) that an embodied pedagogy may create the conditions for new understandings, and yet we continue to design experiences, including practicum, that may sustain rather than disrupt the conditions of schooling described by Efland (1976), Eisner (1976), Fine (1991), McLaren (1988) and Willis (1977).   In the following section, I explore how experience may develop this provocation to new thought or sustain normative perceptions of practice. To do so, I examine Deleuze’s (1991) construction of the composites of experience, memory and perception, as well as his (1989a,b) work with Henri Bergson’s cinematic philosophy to examine the emergence and affirmation of natural perception. I look to practices of reflection and narrative cohesion to interrogate their pedagogical import in both research and teacher education and suggest instead that through artistic practices, particularly filmmaking, the minoritarian and nomad, the return to schools, might produce difference rather than sameness in teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice. Potentials of Cohesion and Normative Perception 	   Deleuze’s (1986a,b) use of filmic construction elucidates how experience might tend to conform rather than provoke thinking. Specifically, experience as a pedagogical condition must disrupt rather than affirm recognition. As I described in the Prelude, I engaged teacher candidates in processes that I felt would create the conditions for their perceptions of practices to become amenable to change; yet I did not adequately consider these processes as something that might restrict their capacities for new thought, as their perceptions of teaching remained naturalized 	   	   24	  and normal. Deleuze (1986a,b) explored how natural perception is confirmed, by examining Bergson’s argument that a cinematographic illusion or false movement is produced as film, as a series of still images strung together that are then mechanically wound past the projector light. The mechanism of movement that draws the still images past the light is abstracted from the movement, which suggests, for Bergson, expresses the production of natural perception. We take snapshots, as it were, of the passing reality, and, as these are characteristic of the reality, we have only to string them on a becoming, abstract, uniform and invisible, situated at the back of the apparatus of knowledge, in order to imitate what there is that is characteristic in this becoming itself. (Bergson, 1998, p. 306) This abstract movement produces the illusion of coherence and continuity, while the mechanism of movement remains outside, abstracted from the meaning produced. These images or privileged instants are connected in transition, a transition that is “of no interest in itself” (Bergson, 1998, p. 361). The privileged instants or ideal poses mark the passage of the individual—baby to girl to woman, or teacher candidate to teacher—and assume an abstracted movement from one point to another rather than understanding the transition or movement situating these points or identities as arrivals rather than becomings.   Deleuze (1986a) interrogated Bergson’s interest in pre-WWI filmic construction as he questioned Bergson’s thesis of abstracted movement. Deleuze developed Bergson’s philosophy through the newer technology and modern cinema to argue that the movement image was distinct from Bergson’s time image, as the camera was freed from a fixed position and placed in the director’s hand, so to speak. In this way, movement provided by the movement of the camera as well as the actors and agents moving into the shot was within as well as between frames. For 	   	   25	  Deleuze (1986a) this unique and individuated movement allowed for the shift from privileged instants and ideal poses to “any-instants-whatsoever. As Bogue (2003) argued,  Instead of the ancient series of ideal poses, we have a sequence of instants, no one of which is privileged over any other, each selected through an indifferent, impartial and uniform mechanism, yet any one of which may prove to be singular or regular. (p. 23) Movement was disengaged from between bodies or objects within the frame of the shot, as the camera provided a second form of movement, in the hand of the cameraperson—and the cameraperson thereby became implicated in the shot through this secondary movement providing a cinematic consciousness.   This consciousness is distinct from the narrative form, as it remains attuned to those experiences that fall outside the narrative form. Duration is key to this understanding of consciousness as Deleuze (1986 a;b) argues that film or the cinema provides a dramatization of time that disregards linear time and instead argues for an ‘infinite set ‘ (Deleuze, 1986 a, p. 58) of  alternate endings and different versions of films, suggesting that film work is perpetually incomplete as alternatives continue to be produced. The precondition to this form of consciousness is duration and the simultaneity of the virtual.  Unlike the cinematic consciousness, the traditional narrative form, which tends to explore what Dewey (1934) described as an experience, focuses on those ideal poses and privileged instants that conform to the larger event or experience developed in the narrative. The traditional narrative form draws on Dewey’s (1934) an experience, conforming and shaping experiences to maintain the narrative unity: 	   	   26	  an experience has a unity that gives it its name, that meal, that storm, that rupture of friendship. The existence of this unity is constituted by a single quality that pervades the entire experience in spite of the variation of its constituent parts. . . . In going over an experience in mind after its occurrence, we may find that one property rather than another was sufficiently dominant so that it characterizes the experience as a whole. (p. 38)   Dewey’s notion of an experience, and the cohesion of other, less noteworthy, experiences, inform Ricoeur’s (1992) narrative identity, which underpins the narrative form drawn on by traditional narrative inquiry research (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990, 2000). The concept of Ricoeur’s narrative identity offers a conception of identity that is “coherent, bounded, individualized, intentional, the locus of thought, action, and belief, the origin of its own actions, the beneficiary of a unique biography” (Zembylas, 2003, p. 107). In constructing identity in this way, identity formation is conceptualized as linear and progressive. For Ricoeur (1992), narrative identity developed through a hermeneutic and linguistic approach exploring ipse, identity as self-hood, and idem, identity as sameness, forms the individual as an uninterrupted continuity, despite time being a “factor of dissemblance, of divergence, of difference” (p. 117).   Ricoeur (1992) argued that the narrative identity pulls together disparate forms of identity within a temporal time frame, drawing connections to qualitative attributes, including events contingent on places and characters in the narrative, into unification. This unification melds multiple perspectives, beliefs and attitudes into the traditional narrative form and positions the story as that which forms the identity of the character. Coherence and unity produce a recognizable character, and the subject is further created through the stability of events in the 	   	   27	  narrative. The events or practices stay normalized as the focus of attention remains on the subject.   This process of narrative cohesion around a significant Event or an experience organizes and realigns experiences to achieve unity. The Events of the narrative experience draw attention from those particular everyday qualities of experience, leaving them already in place. Yet, the everyday, mundane and ritual practices, which remain outside of consciousness, may serve to shape perceptions in a substantive way than events of significance. These practices transform perceptions, yet in the narrative form, these daily practices, left in place and unscrutinized, further normalize practices. The success of the narrative depends on the story maintaining resemblance so that continuity remains intact. This process of narrative cohesion suggests that particular experiences have shaped particular understandings and that through narrative inquiry, an individual is able to identify and reflect on these experiences and write the stories of their experiences, making them available to themselves and researchers to help gain a greater understanding of particular phenomena, including the teaching identity. These forms of narrative inquiry and reflexive processes (Schön, 1983) have been utilized as pedagogical devices in teacher education as a mode of learning, to turn back on experience as an object of reflection. Mathew and Jessel (2006) asserted that reflexivity indicates that teachers have both a social and intellectual consciousness and unconsciousness, and that by turning back on themselves through reflection, they will be better able to resist norms and stereotypical actions. O’Brien and Schillaci (2010) argued that student teachers’ “value systems have to be surfaced and acknowledged during teacher preparation if what we do is to make a difference in their deeply held beliefs about education” (p. 26). They claimed that stories of experience are the closest that we might come to experience, and that 	   	   28	  through reflection, we give meaning to experience, which impacts the future. In these processes of reflection, reflexivity, narrative work and practicum, experience is conceptualized as a past event, which must be understood in the present to inform the future. This process compartmentalizes experience as an object for cognitive work, as it dismisses the embodiment of experience and its pedagogical potential in learning through, rather than from, experience.  Pillow (2003) found the use of reflexivity problematic in that it purportedly creates the conditions for the transcendence of subjectivity and context. Reflexivity situates the one who remembers and reflects as ontologically distinct from the event of reflection. In doing so, the authority to remember and recollect rests with the individual, who sustains a humanist authority to narrate the experience distinct from the entangled nature of the event of narration. Butler (2005) examined the problematics of the entanglement of the self in the moral coherence of the narrative form, suggesting a limited and repetitive repertoire of “teacher.” Consequently, knowledge extending from the experience and reflexive practice potentially ignores material conditions and context and is bound to impulses aimed at sustaining a particular image of teacher or the teaching subject, rather than implicating the self in practice (Britzman, 2009). Processes of recollection and memory sustain the centered humanist “I” for its ability to reflect on the object of experience as a separate ontological event. For Massumi (2002), reflexivity, as such, is a faulty conceptualization, because the virtual—as memory and perceptions—cannot be forced into actualization, suggesting that reflection does not produce a stable “self” that can be shaped through reflection and thereby produced in the real.  I argue that by drawing on the reflection and narration of the Deweyian an experience, the mundane and the everyday, or what Dewey (1934) refers to as the anesthetic, are subsumed into a cohesive narrative and are those that resist interrogation through either research or 	   	   29	  pedagogy. I suggest that as we attend to the Events or an experience, we organize what may be perceived as lesser experiences, including the mundane and the everyday, to sustain the cohesion of the narrative. Drawing on the works of Apple (1971), Bowles and Gintis (1975), Eisner (1976), Fine, (1991), McLaren (1988), O’Donoghue (2007) and Willis (1977), I argue that the tacit, repetitive, ritual and hidden aspects of the mundane remain outside of the scope of interrogation of narrative and reflexive inquiry. I further argue that these sites offer rich potentialities for teacher candidates to re-inhabit schooling through lived memories, provoking new ideas and perceptions about schooling and teacher practice.   Similar to those presenting the post-qualitative and contemporary aesthetics discussed earlier, Andrews, Squire and Tamboukou (2008) argued that contemporary narrative research has undergone a deterritorialization of its own, through those working with Foucault and Deleuze. Andrews et al. (2008) argued that contemporary narrative work assumes “that multiple, disunified subjectivities were involved in the production and understandings of narrative, rather than singular, agentic storytellers and hearers” (p. 3). This deterritorialization of narrative research suggests how the stories of experience emerge in the midst of experience rather than as an object of reflection. In doing so, the narratives must account for the everyday habitual, mundane and repetitious qualities of experience and lived memory.  The interrogation of the mundane and the everyday is resisted in traditional narrative inquiry because of the focus on the Event as the experience, consistent with Dewey’s (1934) an experience, and because of linear narrative cohesion that suspends the viewer/reader/composer within the cohesive narrative. This narrative form draws our attention to the story, rather than the constructed nature of the story or the mode of production, reminiscent of the Deleuzian/Bergsonian (1991) discussion of how passing film across a light source produces a 	   	   30	  reality abstracted from the mechanisms of movement. The viewer is not critically implicated in the meaning making, and so meaning is perceived as natural, pre-existing and already in place. These lesser experiences of the tacit and mundane thus remain unscrutinized and render the Events of experience as normative (Tamboukou, 2010). The traditional narrative forms utilized in American cinema, for example, “suppress the process of their own making” and sustain the illusion of the cohesive narrative form (Willerslev & Suhr, 2013, p. 7). The value of sequence as an organizing trait of narratives (Tamboukou, 2010), the authority of the one in telling and retelling (De Freitas, 2007; Jackson & Mazzei, 2008), the moral cohesion of the narrative (Butler, 2005), the production of experience as an object of narration (Massumi, 2002) and the production of identity through narrative (Butler, 2005; Pillow, 2003) indicate that processes of understanding memory and experience in traditional narrative form may serve to rigidify natural perceptions.  How then might the return produce difference rather than repetition and a disunity of subject positionings? In the following section, I explore this question through the concepts of the mundane and the everyday to better understand the potential of the return and art practice to in creating the conditions for new and creative thought as being in the midst of, rather than reflecting on, memory and experience.  The Mundane and the Everyday 	   Researchers have explored aspects and practices of the mundane, including non-places (Augé, 1995), practices of the “obscure background of social activity” (de Certueau, 1988, p. xi), everyday life or the quotidian (Lefebvre, 2002; 2008a,b) and mythologies of everyday culture (Moran, 2005). These cultural theorists offer the everyday and the mundane as a departure from the Event as an object of study. In his Critique of Everyday Life (2008), Lefebvre aimed to 	   	   31	  critique everyday life through a Marxist framework and “to demonstrate to philosophers that the trivial should not be exempt from philosophical scrutiny” (p. xxv). Johnstone (2008) argued artists who draw on and shape the everyday have heightened the mundane so that it achieves the status of an Event, with the intention that we might reflect on the everyday experience to learn from/about it. I argue that this process of granting the everyday a heightened status continues to perpetuate the practices that sustain normative ways of engaging with learning from, rather than through, experience. Experience remains an object of reflection, distinct from the one remembering it.  Johnstone (2008) argued that 1990s contemporary art was captivated with the everyday, focusing on the trivial and commonplace of everyday life. Artists, including Tracy Emin and her work My Major Retrospective, at White Cube, London, in 1993, which was composed of minutiae from her life that were carefully recomposed in the gallery space (Fanthome, 2006). While autobiographical in nature, the work pointed to the everyday acts of acquiring documents of living, including ticket stubs and other mementos. Emin’s attention to those practices heightened these everyday, banal documents and practices of living, suggesting a unique aesthetic of the routine of living. Highmore (2010) argued that cultural studies often neglects the particular rhythms of everyday routine, and posed pointed, significant questions about the study of routine. He asked, “how, supposing we wanted to, would we call attention to such non-events, without betraying them, without disloyalty to the particularity of their experience, without simply turning them into ‘events’” (p. 307)?   Highmore (2010) examined Molesworth’s (2000) discussion of 1970s feminist art practices in House Work and Art Work as treating artworks as forms of research suited to the description of experience. In these instants, Highmore found that “the structures of routine do not 	   	   32	  seem to easily provide aesthetic forms” (p. 308), and so he began to outline “social-aesthetic approaches to everyday routines” (p. 308) to examine the ambiguity rather than the consistency and origin of routine. Similar to Bennett’s (2012) practical aesthetic, Highmore’s discussion of a social aesthetic disrupts the cohesive way that events like the everydayness of cooking dinner, for example, have been treated through singular discourses, including cultural studies and critical theory as a gendered performance. In this aesthetic, Highmore argued: “my project is the search for aesthetic forms and approaches that are not stymied by the need to make categorical judgments as to the worth or otherwise of routine” (p. 321). He argued that the rhythms of the body, while in many ways conditioned by routine, also condition routine. As discussed earlier, Ruitenberg (2014) and Kalin (2014) both argued that the telos of social critique, perpetuated in elevating the everyday, positions our experience with art in a range of what is known and possible. In keeping with the former critique of narrative, reflection, reflexivity and practicum, subjecting art and its practices as social critiques frames what is known and possible rather than provoking an opportunity to think alterity.   The return to school, as a form of experience designed to disrupt rather than affirm the teacher candidate’s perceptions of practice, required that they explore the space as a visitor—or, more precisely, a nomad (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987). The nomad, similar to the visitor to the Holocaust Museum described by Ellsworth (2005), would traverse the space as neither insider (as a student, teacher or teacher candidate) nor outsider offering critique. Instead, they might navigate through a sensorial experience that would offer a mode of inquiry, which would put them in motion both physically and cognitively as well as psychically. This mode of inquiry, according to Garoian (2013), resists the need to organize the experience around the teaching identity or to raise the mundane to the level of critique. Instead, like Deleuze and Guattari’s 	   	   33	  (1987) concept of the nomad, the inquiry would draw on affective intensities, produced in the sensorial return, guiding the art practice and choices through an embodied, affective response, delaying critique or interpretation. In doing so, the return would not serve to overthrow the majoritarian perspectives of schooling, but instead would allow for a unique and individuated nomadic return that might open a minoritarian understanding. The Nomad and the Minoritarian: Art Practice and the Embodiment of the Everyday and Mundane Schooling 	   In Toward a Minor Literature (1986), Deleuze and Guattari developed the concept of minority as not a scarcity of numbers, but a fissure in the monolith of a majority. They explored how the emergence of languages such as Yiddish (described in Chapter 3) disrupted the majoritarian dominance of German, offering subtle resistance to the ways through which language signified and perpetuated dominant cultural norms. The notion of minoritarian as becoming embodies alterity, in knowing in and through the experience of a majority perspective. The minoritarian creates the potential for alterity and an alternative within dominant discourses. Bolt (2004) argued that as we engage in the “sensory effect of materials that activate bodily memory” (p. 166), we become untangled from the play of signifiers. The nomad (Deleuze & Guattari, 1986, p. 197) draws on affective intensity to explore a territory through an individuated response to place. In the attention to how affect triggers bodily responses, we become minoritarian, creating the potential to learn from our bodily attunement rather than a majoritarian perspective. To consider the potential of the return outside of reflection and critique, the everyday of schools cannot be an object to be produced and critiqued; it needs to be experienced. To encounter the everyday of schooling is to be made unrecognizable through becoming untangled from the signifiers of schooling. Art practice may enable a mode of artistic inquiry that draws on this delay of interpretation. 	   	   34	   For Deleuze and Guattari (1987), the nomad traverses smooth territories—which allow multiple movements in indeterminate ways—expanding the borders of the territory as the movements further deterritorialize the striated and organized plane of the territory. To return as a teacher, student or student teacher striates the territory of the school, framing understandings within known discourses and movements. The return to schools to examine the pedagogical potentiality and explore, through artistic practice, the space as an installation suggests the potential for what Garoian (2013) described: The exploratory, experimental and improvisational movements of art practice are similarly constituted as continuity embraces discontinuity, a processual rhythm of engagements that are out of phase . . . where the body’s control of material includes a relinquishment of control to those very materials. (p. 126) In returning, the nomad does not seek to either critique or affirm the nature of the territory, but to explore, improvise and experiment with the materials of the territory, expanding the known potentials. As Christen and Kelsie return to explore the schools through filmmaking, the potential to encounter schooling as unrecognizable yet simultaneously recognizable produces, through art practice, what Rancière (2013) refers to as a double effect. This effect offers a “dynamic combining the readability of a political signification and a sensible or perceptual shock caused conversely by the uncanny, by that which resists signification” (p. 46). The double effect indicates that while the encounter does offer a diffuse possibility, the readability of the school indicates that the encounter disrupts recognizable and representational thought and thus is not a complete abstraction. In doing so, the return opens up the potential for the yet unknowable but also provides the potential to learn about the conditions for new and creative perceptions of teacher practice. 	   	   35	   The physical and cognitive returns of teacher candidates to schools, to learn to teach, shape perceptions of what is possible for teacher practice within known discourses of schooling and the teaching identity. Through reflection and the practicum, the pedagogical potential of the return remains tied to both memories and perceptions of practices that continue to endure in commonsensical approaches that affirm normative understandings. The return to schools through art practice suggests potential for alternate forms of learning through experience rather than from experience, suggesting an affective form of knowing that is resisted in current models of the pedagogical return. The nomadic processes of art practice smooth the striated territory of schooling, allowing for alternate experiences and affective ways of knowing that form generative connections and new potentials for perceptions of teacher practice.  In Chapter 2, I explore Christen and Kelsie’s films of their return to their high schools. I explore their responses to the prompts that I provided them in their return and how they developed particular meanings in place. I consider the aesthetic choices that each made in the return and how these choices stimulated particular conversations in our dialogue sessions. I also consider our subsequent dialogue sessions as sites for additional meaning making about the return. I explore the memories that emerged for Christen and Kelsie during the return, and the aesthetic choices each made in her film, to understand how particular experiences and artistic practice may create opportunities for teacher candidates to encounter their perceptions of practice.   	  	   	   36	   Potentials of Post-Qualitative Research and Ontology 	   In the outline of the principles of the rhizome9, Deleuze and Guattari (1987) describe an asignifying rupture as the point of departure of a line of flight.  This line of flight functions as a deterritorialization of the rhizome as it produces alternate, yet connected movements of the rhizome, thereby expanding the territory of the rhizome. Rather than being separate or distinct, the line of flight remains part of the rhizome, yet at the point of rupture an offshoot forms, which proceeds to navigate new terrains and form new connections. Through processes of deterritorialization and reterritorialization, the rhizome functions as a multiplicity whose dimensions increase through lines of flight, new assemblages and new knowledge in the generative connections, creating continued change in the multiplicity of the rhizome. The potential of deterritorializations is not located in and of themselves but in the ways they provoke change to a multiplicity.   The emergence of qualitative forms of research ruptured the territory of positivist research, producing a line of flight from strict positivist forms of knowledge and knowing in quantitative forms of research, and in doing so, navigated new terrains and formed new connections (St. Pierre, 2013). This desire for the deterritorialization of the territory of positivist 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  9 For Deleuze & Guattari, (1987) the concept of the rhizome offers characteristics or principles of a system that disrupts the traditional arboreal image of thought and instead looks to the connectivity and movement of plants, such as the strawberry plant or animal rhizomes such as ants. Rather than fixed and emerging from rooted thought, thinking is movement across planes and territories.  Encounters with thought form asignifying ruptures that produce fissures in the tendrils of the rhizome, redirecting thought in new directions and spreading across new territories. A line of flight suggest a departure or mutation from reality or over territorialized assemblages.  Lines of flight expand the territory, producing and produced by new thought, offering material bodies new capacities to act. Described earlier in this chapter, the nomad traverses territories as smooth spaces, uninhibited by rooted or recognizable thought and instead develops new connections and understandings rather than tracing previous images of thought. Their movement, much like the rhizome’s lacks a deterministic nature. 	   	   37	  research extended from the post-WWII horror of wartime atrocities and the subsequent racial tensions, minority tensions and social problems perpetuated in the United States in the war’s aftermath, as well as the social movements of the 1960s–1980s (Kemmis, 1980; St. Pierre, 2013). Qualitative researchers in this paradigm produced extensive epistemological critiques of marginalized knowledges and identity politics to offer social and cultural critique and reform, enclosing identity and the self within humanist conceptions of the authoritative “I” of experience and narrative. Rather than forming a distinct line of flight, though, St. Pierre (2013) argued that the methods and methodology in qualitative research persist in sustaining the legacy of humanism and positivistic undertones, and “that the posts have had little effect on the humanist underpinnings of qualitative inquiry, chiefly because its ontology remains intact: (p. 649).  As qualitative research reterritorialized around epistemology and identity politics, post-qualitative researchers (Braidotti, 2013; Jackson, 2013; Jackson & Mazzei, 2012; Lenz Taguchi, 2012, 2013; MacLure, 2013; Mazzei, 2013; St. Pierre, 2013; Tamboukou, 2008a,b) drawing on the works of Derrida, Deleuze, Deleuze and Guattari, and Foucault sought a rupture by pursuing ontology and immanence10 as a line of flight. This line of flight does not posit a dualism but further expands the multiplicity of research, in the pursuit of ontology through empirical research. This pursuit of ontology suggests that being, rather than stable and known, is moving and changing—the Deleuzian (1990) event expressed as the infinitive becoming. It forms connections and resists the representations and exteriority of identity and the centered “I” of 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  10 Deleuze and Guattari (1987) explored the rhizome as a forerunner to immanence as the active production rather than representation of the unconscious. Immanence, then, is deeply connected to becoming and to difference, in and of itself, in that rather than considering what a body has done, or the representation of what a body has done, immanence is concerned with the potentiality of what a body can do in a continuous state of becoming. Immanence is an ontology of difference, a perpetual state of difference or becoming. To explore this perpetual state, we must consider duration as an expression of time, and the virtual as memory and perception. This difference is connected to the concepts of change discussed throughout this dissertation. 	   	   38	  humanism. St. Pierre (2013) argued that “[i]n this ontology, thinking and living are simultaneities, and we have to think possible worlds in which we might live” (p. 655).  The ontological imperative identified by these post-qualitative researchers and scholars emerges through particular experiences and potentialities enmeshed in being. To pursue ontology requires one to be in the midst of rather than at a privileged position of looking forward or reflecting back. Forms of knowing expressed through ontology suggest that we learn through rather than from experience. To explore research as ontological requires alternate conceptualizations and practices as we lose the object of research and instead pursue research though Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987) infinitive of becoming. In this loss of the privileged “I,” new insights are gained about the qualities of experience as creative, generative acts for both pedagogy and research. Contemporary Art Practice, Ontology, and an Arts-Based Educational Research Methodology 	   In a similar epistemological shift experienced in research, the value of aesthetics as a study of beauty was displaced in the turn to the arts’ embeddedness in the social, cultural and political world, and its potential to offer ideological critique (Bennett, 2012). Artists, including performance artist Marina Abramović and her work Rhythm 0 (1974), for example, challenged expectations and perceptions of the relationship between artist, viewer and gallery space, offering social, institutional and cultural critique through various critical lenses, among them Marxist and feminist perspectives. Scholars such as Kalin (2014) and Ruitenberg (2011, 2014), though, have questioned the “eagerness” of artists and curators to utilize critique not as the creation of something new, but as a way of leading viewers towards a priori conclusions. Ruitenberg (2014) argues: 	   	   39	  To claim that art is inherently pedagogical, that it teaches us something—even if the claim is that it does so not through what it represents but through the way it calls attention to its medium—is to burden art with a telos or purpose and limit its autonomy. (p. 191) As many artists and art theorists in the 21st century have taken up the works of Derrida, Foucault and, most significantly, Deleuze, O’Sullivan (2010) has argued that perhaps what is now at stake with contemporary art “is the repetition of previous art forms, and indeed non art forms of life from elsewhere, but repetition with difference” (p. 194). He suggested that a return to aesthetics in contemporary art is not a return to Kantian aesthetics of beauty11 but a consideration of the potential of art to first disrupt our habitual ways of knowing, a project of critique—but most importantly that this disruption is located in the potential within the creation of something new.  This potentiality of contemporary art practice and theories of aesthetics, coupled with post-qualitative theory in this methodological experimentation, draws on my assertions as well as others’ (Bresler, 2006; Eisner & Barone, 2006; Irwin, 2006; jagodzinski & Wallin, 2013; O’Donoghue, 2010; Springgay et al. 2005; Sullivan, 2006, 2010) that the arts in their many forms have a unique potential to provoke new ways of knowing and being.12 This potential is stymied through a continued faulty reliance on methodological elements from the humanities and 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  11 Kant’s aesthetics are primarily concerned with judgments of beauty, based on sensations of pleasure, and are expressed as universalities (Zepke, 2010). Deleuze drew on Kant’s aesthetics of sensation yet dismissed the notion of universality through immanent individuation. Aesthetics for Kant was an object of philosophy, while the current trend in rethinking aesthetics looks to aesthetics as “a way of doing” (Bennett, 2012, p. 3), as inherent in the ontology of difference. 12 It is important to note here that while I am interested the conditions in which teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice are destabilized, I am not advocating for a process through which we specifically target certain perceptions in order to destabilize them and supplant them with another understanding. 	   	   40	  social sciences (jagodzinski & Wallin, 2013); hence, alternate conceptualization and practices must be considered. Ruitenberg’s (2014) research and scholarship—drawing on Rancière’s work on art, the pedagogical relationship, and double effect—further develop understandings of this process. She has argued “the primary role of the arts is to intervene in human perception. . . . they do not prescribe what I should see or how I should see things differently (Ruitenberg, 2014, p. 191). How, then, might art practice intervene in perception? How might art practice participate in the creation of new perceptions? What are the implications for research and pedagogy?   In Rhythm 0 (1974), Abramović developed a six-hour participatory performance piece in Galleria Studio Morra gallery in Naples, Italy. Abramović laid out 72 objects on a table and invited those in attendance to use the implements on her body, as she stood passively. This work, as well as those of many other feminist performance artists in the 1970s, explored the female body as a medium for art, challenging assumptions and representations of gender in art, politics and culture. Cornelia Butler (2007), curator of the exhibition Wack! Art and the Feminist Revolution, argued that feminist art practices emerged in concert with multiple lines of activism extending from the 1960s and 70s and focused on two central tenets: “The personal is political, and all representation is political” (Butler, 2007, p. 15). These tenets dismiss the notion of neutrality, favoring the inherent politicization of all representations, and point to critical inquiry through art as enabling what Garoian (2001) referred to as “comprehensive critical inquiry, a performative pedagogy that introduces content in the museum from a complex of cultural perspectives that heretofore have played marginal roles” (p. 239). While Kalin (2014), O’Sullivan (2006) and Ruitenberg (2014) cautioned against art as telos, art practice as any 	   	   41	  representation is caught in the political, but it need not work to illuminate or solve a particular social, cultural or political problem in order to create the conditions for new thought to occur.  During her performance, Abramović offered no resistance as gallery viewers used the tools to inflict pain and pleasure on her body. Viewers intervened as one participant loaded a gun, placed the gun in Abramović’s hand, raised both to Abramović’s head and pressed the artist’s finger against the trigger to see whether she would finally resist. This work speaks strongly to how particular art practices make visible the ways in which certain places are produced in and through the performance of place. In this performance, the gallery space itself, while remaining a space for art, became undone. Abramović’s performance challenged viewers’ performance of the space and shaped their experience. The performance created a complex dialogue between the apparent neutrality of the museum space and the highly politicised nature made visible through the performance. Abramović and the participants’ performance simultaneously challenged the neutrality of the space while pointing to the potential to re-inscribe a new meaning of the space through performance. In his work on performative museum pedagogy, Garoian (2001) argued:  Viewers’ agency enables their use of museum culture as a source through which to imagine, create, and perform new cultural myths that are relevant to their personal identities. In doing so, a critical dialogue is created between viewers and the museum. (p. 235) Abramović’s performance created a critical dialogue that challenged assumptions about the purposes and practices of galleries, but as the participants performed alongside her, the “viewers [brought] their personal identities into play with the institution’s dominant 	   	   42	  ideologies. In doing so, they [were] able to imagine and create new possibilities for museums and their artifacts within their contemporary cultural lives” (Garoian, 2001, p. 236).  Performance art such as Rhythm 0 achieves what Garoian (2001) described as “risk-taking pedagogy” (p. 239), whereby the museum enables an interrogation and critique of its ideology by inviting a dialogic process between institutional and individuated narratives. As an arts-based methodology, my work draws on this understanding of performance and the pedagogy of place through the habitual and mundane practices that form the territories and, subsequently, the performances of teachers and students within schools.   I argue that Christen and Kelsie’s act of filmmaking may create the potential to perceive something new not only in the familiarity and expectations of school spaces, but in the practices that they and I have come to associate with teaching art in schools. I argue that through art practice, we might come to be what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) referred to as nomads—who traverse territories in smooth rather than striated spaces—and, in the performance of the nomad, create new potentials for school space ideology and the teacher practices associated with these spaces. Rather than effecting a complete deterritorialization, the nomad produces individuated meaning that destabilizes the dominant discourses and, in doing so, disrupts the consistency of the territory. Teacher Candidates: Perceptions and Expectations in Teacher Education and Practice 	   Researchers suggest that teacher candidates struggle with drawing on and developing new understandings about teaching practice and education during teacher education programs (Britzman, 2003; Bullock & Gailbraith, 1992; Carter, 1993; Clandinin, 1985; Gess-Newsome et 	   	   43	  al., 2003; Grauer, 1998; Munby, 1982, 1984; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992; Phelan, 2005; Raudenbush, Rowan, & Cheong, 1992). Britzman (2003) stated: The story of learning to teach begins much earlier than the time one first decides to become a teacher. The mass experience of public education has made teaching one of the most familiar professions in this culture. Implicitly, schooling fashions the meaning, realities, and experiences of students; thus those learning to teach draw from their subjective experiences constructed from actually being there. . . . In part, this accounts for the persistency of particular worldviews, orientations, dispositions, and cultural myths that dominate our thinking and, in unintended ways, select the practices that are available in educational life. (p. 27) Rather than suggesting an alternate conception of teaching, a new or alternate pedagogical practice or an alternate base of knowledge that teachers might acquire for best practices, my research explores teaching as a perpetual process of learning, or what Irwin and O’Donoghue (2013) have referred to as learning to learn rather than learning to teach. Britzman (2003) argued that through the K-12 educational experience, teacher candidates and others have come to understand teaching in terms of a student being opposite to a teacher, and in those experiences have developed perceptions about what constitutes good and bad teacher practice. Through a 13-year schooling process, in some cases, teacher candidates enter teacher education programs with their perceptions about teaching firmly in place. Irwin and O’Donoghue (2013) explored the potential of contemporary art practices in teacher education programs as learning to learn rather than learning to teach. For Irwin and O’Donoghue (2013) the spaces between fixed identities, including a pedagogue, artist, and researcher become the generative places where new knowledge is formed which may disrupt the fixity of these identities.  In doing so, teacher 	   	   44	  education becomes less about learning to become and perhaps master one of these particular identities, and instead becomes about the movement between and across these identities to form new knowledge that is not fixed in one identity or the other. The pedagogical practices within teacher education thereby shift away from training13 teachers within structured discourses of teaching and instead look to experiences to create new understandings of teacher practices.  These understandings have informed my research, as have those proposed by Grauer (1998), who argued that teachers are the curriculum and that their beliefs about education and teacher practice manifest in their own classroom practices, thus playing a more significant role than formal curriculum in how art teachers teach. To create the potential for teaching practice to be amenable to change, and to provoke change in how teaching and learning occurs in the art classroom, teacher education must be involved not only in disrupting teacher candidates’ perceptions about teaching and practice but also in the conditions for creating new thought, perceptions and, perhaps, practices. During teacher education programs, the perceptions that have formed through experience and various discourses about teaching manifest themselves as pre-service teachers’ expectations and anticipations about how and what they will learn, and are those which potentially participate as resistance to new ways of knowing (Book, 1983; Cherubini 2008; Cole & Knowles, 1993; Weinstein, 1988). I and others (Lynch, 2000; Massumi, 2002; Pillow, 2003; Tamboukou, 2008b) argue that devices, including narrative inquiry and reflexivity, designed to create a unique opportunity to locate their perceptions in a means to unseat the authority in their performance of practice, may have instead potentially colluded in sustaining perceptions of practice.  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  13 I am distinguishing teacher education that trains teachers to perform teaching as an acquisition of skills rather than as an opportunity to disrupt perceptions and known practices of teaching through inquiry and research. 	   	   45	  In the persistence of epistemology and identity politics critiqued by post-qualitative research—namely, the centered “I” of the humanist desire for the authority of the self in reflexivity and identity discourses—qualitative methodologies and pedagogical strategies need to be further interrogated to identify and examine practices and experiences that stabilize perceptions rather than disrupt them. While narrative inquiry has gained significant ground in how research attends to minority narratives, and narrative writing has offered insights into and opportunities for inquiry through writing, elements of narrative work (specifically the narrative form and the practices of recollection) remain imbued with humanist authoritative aspects.  By drawing on these understandings and the findings from this research, I propose a research methodology and pedagogical strategy that draws on ontological understandings as well as art practices to expand the territories of research and pedagogy. This methodological and pedagogical strategy aims to explore experience and affect produced through encounters to disrupt perceptions of teacher practices. In this research, I do not suggest that one view of teaching should supplant another, but that teacher education programs should provoke a disposition of learning to learn (Irwin & O’Donoghue, 2013) rather than learning to teach. Teacher candidates and teachers would thereby engage in learning14 through experience so that their perceptions and memories of teaching would continue to be amenable to change as processes of becoming. The discourse of teacher education would thus shift from the teaching identity and epistemology to teacher becoming and ontological difference. In the following section, I outline the four remaining chapters of this dissertation.   	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  14 Learning and pedagogy in this dissertation are characterized by Deleuze’s (1994) discussion of thought as trespass and violence. 	   	   46	  Chapter Summaries 	   In Chapter 2, “Christen and Kelsie’s Films,” I describe their films and our dialogue sessions to explore the types of experiences and memories that were performed in place. I examine the aesthetic choices that each made and the locations they returned to, as I consider how the return and filmmaking produced alternate performances of the school space and the potential of art practice to create the conditions for alternate perceptions.  In Chapter 3, “Deterritorializing Time: Encounter and Montage in Research and Pedagogy,” I explore observations and understandings derived from Christen and Kelsie’s films and consider the implication of the conception of time as linear for both research and pedagogical decisions made in relation to teacher candidates’ understandings of teacher practice. I explore a non-linear conception of time as montage, which offers important insights into how teacher candidates enact meaningful learning through experience rather than from experience. In Chapter 4, “Deterritorializing Experience: The Nomadic Inquiry of the Mundane and the Present Absence,” I explore observations I made regarding the particular spaces to which Christen and Kelsie returned in their high schools. I consider how Christen and Kelsie’s exploration of the school spaces as artists through filmmaking was a form of sensory/affective nomadic inquiry that attended to the transitional, mundane and everyday school spaces, including the hallways and stairwells, rather than events of significance that they identified prior to the return. I explore how these places activated in the group sessions dialogue that seemed to draw on personal rather than commonplace and perhaps generic understandings of school space and offered a unique opportunity to explore the mundane and a present form of absence as rich sites for memory production and reinhabitance, as well as a form of artistic inquiry. 	   	   47	   In Chapter 5, “An Arts-based Methodology of Intuition: Potential of Research,” I draw on findings from Chapters 3 and 4 to propose and develop an arts-based methodology of intuition, which emerged through generative connections made to the findings related to time and experience in recursive and elaborated acts of research design and enactment. This methodology is informed by Deleuze/Bergson’s (1991) three rules for a Methodology of Intuition but draws on Christen and Kelsie’s work related to time and experience to suggest unique opportunities to pursue arts-based educational research with the aim of problematizing, differentiating and temporalizing knowledge. In this chapter, I take up the first rule of the methodology, which looks to the creation of potential rather than to solving problems as an imperative in research that privileges ontology rather than epistemology. 	    	   	   48	  Chapter 2: Christen and Kelsie’s films Introduction In this chapter, I describe in detail the films that Christen and Kelsie produced over a period of about four months during their returns to high school, as well as the film of the dialogue sessions in which Christen, Kelsie and I viewed and discussed their films. To produce these descriptions I viewed the films multiple times, including in the participants’’ absence, during our dialogue sessions, and again alongside transcripts produced from the dialogue sessions. During these observations and dialogue sessions, I explored the qualities of Christen’s and Kelsie’s experience of the return that, in later chapters, I argue produced opportunities for a particular type of attentiveness and particular types of dialogue to emerge in both the school spaces and our dialogue sessions. Drawing on Deleuze’s work on a cinematic philosophy (1986a), I suggest that freeing the camera from fixed forms, including tripods, and placing it in the filmmaker’s hand, produces a particular aesthetic composed of instances within the frame of the shot as any instances whatever. These instances are created through the filmmaker’s snapshots of time or the virtual as what Deleuze (1986a) described the as the simultaneity of the past and future in the present moment. Deleuze (1986a) argued that “[t]he evolution of the cinema, the conquest of its own essence or novelty, was to take place through montage, the mobile camera and the emancipation of the viewpoint, which became separate from projection” (p. 3).  This freedom of the mobile camera15 and mise en scène16 may, I argue, temporally inscribe aesthetic meaning, drawing the filmmaker’s virtual as his or her memories and desires 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  15 The mobile camera implies the freeing of the camera from a fixed point, allowing a range of shots and the ability to follow movement. 	   	   49	  into the frame of the shot. Film theorists developed this concept as auteur theory, which suggests that filmmakers’ aesthetics are consistent and recognizable across the entirety of their work. More than offering the audience a specifically recognizable aesthetic, though, Christen’s and Kelsie’s films and dialogue suggest that the choices each made during the return reflected two broad types of filming. The first type provided a unique and individuated opportunity for meaning making during our group dialogue sessions. The second type attended to the specificity of the prompts and produced a broader, more generic response. I argue that the aesthetic choices that Christen and Kelsie made in their films were uniquely produced in response to their affective responses in the schools and the memories provoked. I suggest that these choices—including a slowing of the camera movement, detailed rather than expansive shots, repetitive filming of the same area and, most significantly, a lack of in-film narration—created an opportunity for their further elaboration and meaning making during the group dialogue session. In particular, I found that those sections of the films that Christen and Kelsie were unable to narrate at the time of shooting were highly personalized and became rich opportunities to consider their perceptions of teaching. While my description of their individual films will attend to similarities as well as unique responses to the return, this is not meant to provide cross-case or binary analysis. Rather, the descriptions of the films of the returns offer an opportunity to engage with and explore the spaces and places to which Christen and Kelsie became attentive. In Chapters 3 through 5, I consider the conditions that made this particular type of attentiveness possible and what might be learned about and through their work as it relates to both pedagogy and arts-based research in teacher education.  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  16 The mise en scène is everything presented before the camera. This includes sets with properties, elements and relations (Colman, 2011). 	   	   50	  The Film and Discussion of the Returns  I met Christen and Kelsie in the secondary visual-art teacher education program at the University of British Columbia. This is a one-year, post-degree teacher education program, and I was their instructor for an elective seminar-based course on art, education and cultural diversity in the fall term of 2012. We gathered for our first meeting in early October after they agreed to participate in this study. Christen had completed a Bachelor of Fine Art (BFA) with a focus on painting and photography, and Kelsie had completed a BFA with a focus on painting, but had taken up digital art and film, which she described as her artistic practice. During our first meeting, both participants asked about the extent to which they could utilize artistic filters and editing tools on the film they shot in the schools. I asked that only in-camera edits be used and that I receive the entire footage that they shot. It was my hope that follow-up reflections and discussion would occur in our group dialogue sessions rather than as individuals editing their films prior to our viewing. I felt that this approach would allow a deeper discussion of the choices that they made during filming rather than during an editing process away from their schools.  Following our initial early fall meeting, both Christen and Kelsie returned to their high schools and shot the interior and exterior of their school spaces. After each return, I collected the cameras from both, downloaded and viewed their films and developed preliminary questions to explore during our dialogue sessions. In the following two sections of this chapter, I describe the films shot by the participants and consider their discussion of their films as we viewed them together. 	   	   51	  Kelsie  Figure 2: Beginning of Kelsie’s film17   Kelsie’s film began as she entered the interior school space of her public grade 8–12 high school and responded to the prompt “Where did I learn in this space? How does this space teach?” She held the camera at eye level as she entered through the doors and as she made a sharp right to continue up a ramp towards a locker-lined hallway. Through her choice of a style that could be described as cinéma vérité,18 I was aware of Kelsie’s presence as the filmmaker by the camera’s jostling as she moved through the school. This shot of Kelsie’s hand is the only instance in which either participant placed herself in the film, yet both were very present because of the hand-held camera movement and occasional narration. Both participants chose to hold the 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  17 Please note that all images are stills taken by me from the participants’ films. 18 Sometimes referred to as the truth of cinema, cinéma vérité is a genre or style of filmmaking that acknowledges the presence of the camera in its rough or raw use. The camera moves with the filmmaker and in doing so acknowledges to a certain extent the filmmaker’s presence, and perhaps a scene that is meant to be captured rather than constructed. As a particular style, cinéma vérité does not suspend the viewer in a narrative as it unfolds; rather, the viewers are aware of the camera and may believe that what they are viewing appears naturally or as a truth rather than a constructed narrative.  	   	   52	  camera rather than set up a tripod or a fixed surface so that they could be filmed as they narrated or as they moved through the space. Both indicated that this choice was made because of the personal nature of the film, and that if they had been shooting a documentary, they would have made different choices. Kelsie’s film initially focused on what seemed to me the more public and generic spaces of transition within the school, including the hallways, stairwells and ramps. She spent time filming the shiny grey linoleum floors and black linoleum baseboards, the light-blue floor-to-ceiling lockers with recessed locks lining the hallways, and the light-grey drop panels and fluorescent lighting that formed the ceiling. Kelsie spent a significant amount of time filming the lockers and the locks, panning the hallway from side to side. Her camera was set on auto-focus, which produced a sound track of the camera lens mechanism searching for a focal point as it moved in and out of focus.   Figure 3: Kelsie’s hallway 	   	   53	  During the dialogue session, Kelsie mentioned that she suspended filming twice so that she could try to stop the camera from moving in and out of focus, yet there was a quality to hearing the camera searching for a point to focus on that emphasized the mundane and repetitive images of the grey school hallway lockers, flooring and empty bulletin boards.  Kelsie did not narrate the film shot in the hallways, and so muted footsteps are audible, as well as the shuffling sounds of clothing, and the low din of activity in a school that has been dismissed for the day. Both Kelsie and Christen indicated that at first, they felt somewhat awkward speaking out loud in the halls. In Kelsie’s film, the voices of others in the school can be heard, and while the people talking are not visible, Kelsie said she was aware of their presence. As we watched the film, Kelsie discussed her lack of narration as something that struck her as “funny,” as she identified the hallway as a space of socialization, yet she remained quiet in the space.   Figure 4: Kelsie’s hallway 2 As she reflected on her silence in the school hallways, she recounted that her memories of schooling took place in the hallways more than in the classroom. Instead of being specific 	   	   54	  memories, they were “just a general thought, if that makes sense . . .” Rather than attaching a certain event or occurrence to the hallways, she considered how most of her memories of schooling were perhaps vague and nonspecific.  As we watched and discussed the film, Kelsie continued to elaborate on the meanings and memories elicited through watching her film. At points, her dialogue appeared to be explanatory so that Christen and I could understand why she had taken particular shots and why she had chosen particular filters. At other points in her dialogue about the film, particularly those she did not narrate, Kelsie contemplated her choices of places shot, as she elaborated on her memories produced during the filming. The movement in the frame of her shot between points of interest—including the lockers, locks and stairwells—produced aesthetic choices based on the affective and sensorial engagement with place at the time of filming. During filming, Kelsie did not develop the meaning that she did during the dialogue sessions, when she processed the experience through language; rather, she remained attentive to the place as she moved from one area to another. Both Christen and Kelsie described that it had been difficult to process what was occurring and that they needed to sit with their work afterwards to consider why they had made particular choices. 	   	   55	   Figure 5: Kelsie’s stairwell In these moments, Kelsie’s style seemed to me to produce a film heavy with mundane repetition, but this aesthetic became inscribed with the meanings produced through Kelsie’s memories and contemplation of place.   During the dialogue sessions, Kelsie sat with her back to me as we viewed the projection of her film on the wall. I had viewed the films prior to our meeting and had developed questions, yet as Kelsie spoke about her film, my understanding of her work changed from it being a documentation of school space to a work that attended to absence. When I asked Christen and Kelsie what triggered their memories in the school, Christen described the sensorial affective engagement of being immersed in the sounds and smells of schooling, and while Kelsie agreed with this, she felt that what was missing in the school shifted her memories of the place. As she searched for things in the school that were missing, other memories began to emerge: For me, it was mostly the sight of different things or areas, because everything is designated to an area—there’s a math area, a socials, a science, and then the art. 	   	   56	  But it was also memories of what wasn’t there, or what wasn’t there now, and then your memories replacing it with what it used to be for you. And for me, that was especially in the photography room because it’s changed so much, and it was really saddening to see. During the dialogue sessions, Kelsie described this type of absence and sadness most significantly during times that she was not narrating within the film. The scenes shot following the stairwell and hallway, for example, concentrated on a humanities classroom that Kelsie had been in during high school. In this space, she focused on a cardboard mock-up of a hockey scoreboard hanging from the classroom ceiling, and in our dialogue session, she began to discuss her memories of her humanities class. She focused on a photo of her class dressed in clothing from the 1800s, taken during a class field trip to Barkerville. At this point in the dialogue session, Kelsie expressed relief that the items that had been in this classroom, including the clock, the images and stuffed animals, were still there. She described how these items created a homey quality and that this helped create a community in the classroom. She compared this room to the painting and drawing room, which she described as empty. This emptiness arose not from a lack of clutter but from the class being more about materials and less about the students, which she felt was related to the new art teacher.   As she left her humanities class and entered the art classroom, she pointed the camera towards multiple instances where the new art teacher had used new artwork to cover up the old work of former students, including multiple wall murals created and painted by art students in her grade. As she filmed this classroom, she began to provide in-film narration of the space for the first time. It began with “Hmmmm…this room is quite different…from what I remember…wow.” Kelsie entered the room with the lights off and did not turn them on as she 	   	   57	  stood at the front of the room and swept it side to side. The deliberate filming of particular images, maps and stuffed animals in the humanities classroom was replaced with quick and sweeping shots of metal drying racks, tables with stools, and dimly lit drawing areas. Rather than moving closer to these items, Kelsie remained further back, providing a landscape rather than a detail of the classroom.  Kelsie walked back, turned the lights on in the classroom and began to move around the room to different areas, filming the drawing spaces and in particular a skeleton that was hung in the class for life drawing, which she remembered she did not enjoy doing. She spent a few more minutes in the classroom and then left without comment. During our dialogue sessions, she described the busyness of her former humanities classroom as homey and integral in forming community. The busyness of her former painting and drawing room, though, produced sadness; as Kelsie described how artwork had been replaced with new artwork, she asked: “So does that make it obsolete because it’s from so long ago?” She pointed the camera towards another mural in the room. “And then again, using new artwork to cover up old artwork.”   Her film continued out in the hallways as she mapped out the murals that she had painted, as well as those of her friends. Like the artwork in the classroom, the murals were slowly being covered by newer images. She filmed her personal portion of the mural, which was composed of black-and-white images of musicians, and she zoomed in on her signature at the bottom of the image. She continued on to film the interior of empty vending machines and a classroom door, prepped with a masking tape grid for another student’s artwork to begin. She continued to film another classroom whose purpose had changed since she had gone to school. What had once been a photo studio, complete with darkroom, had transitioned to a Mac lab and then transitioned again into a room for what Kelsie guessed was yearbook preparation. During the dialogue 	   	   58	  session, Kelsie again expressed sadness at the loss of the darkroom, as the principal had indicated to her that the darkroom was obsolete. From there, Kelsie continued to the school cafeteria, where she filmed student paintings as she recounted a story of a painting contest she had entered; she had not been successful because the image she had submitted was described as too literal. She filmed the artwork that had been included and located a painting that her cousin had created. She concluded filming the interior of the school space by focusing on a wall in the school cafeteria that displayed typical framed class photos of past graduates.  The film that Kelsie shot of the interior spaces expressed a consistent sadness at the loss of her art form, as well as the new art teacher’s practice of covering over former work, artwork being removed, artwork that had never been selected and the administration’s shifting interests away from photography. Kelsie was able to articulate this during the dialogue sessions but rarely during the filming process. She expressed surprise at finding how important the community aspect of the classroom was to her. She discussed that as a teacher, she was more concerned with developing this community through a focus on students rather than materials and by sustaining the history of those who had attended, to support and develop this sense of community in her future classroom.   Once she finished shooting the interior spaces of her school, Kelsie’s film shifted to the exterior. I was surprised that she had gone outside, as I had only imagined responding to how a school taught through the interior space. In this section of the film, Kelsie switched the camera to film in black and white, and she chose long, almost still shots. When I asked her why she had chosen to shoot the exterior of the school, Kelsie said: I think it’s the way my brain works. I paint a lot of architecture, and I paint the memories of architecture. So when I think about spaces, I usually think about the 	   	   59	  exterior. The interior’s not usually thought about, or it’s an afterthought. So when I think of my school, I picture the exterior. So that’s why I wanted to include it.   Figure 6: Exterior of Kelsie’s school Similar to her film of the hallways and stairwells of the school’s interior, it seemed that Kelsie had made very specific choices about how she composed and framed her shot, including the lighting and the filmic transitions from one area of the school to the other. As we viewed this portion of the film, Kelsie articulated these decisions and connected them to her memories of schooling and her art practice in a more sophisticated and elaborate way. During our dialogue session, I asked her about the connections she made between her aesthetic choices and the exterior space. Adrienne: And so do you think that that’s as a result of your artistic interest, or is there something about the exterior space that’s of particular importance to you? Kelsie: I think it’s both, but I think the exterior maybe has something to do with impressions or feelings or… What’s the word I’m trying to say? Yeah, I guess “impressions” kind of encompasses it. Because the way that the building is built 	   	   60	  or the way it looks gives you a feeling of the overall space. So if it’s going to be dark and dingy, you’re going to think that inside is where the people associated with it are. Adrienne: So why did you select black and white do you think? Kelsie: Well, just that kind of goes with my artistic interests because most of my memories aren’t in colour, I feel. I feel that they’re in earth tones or black and white or sepia, unless it’s something really vivid that I attach a special meaning to. So when I paint, it’s often in grey tones or earth tones, especially with European architecture memories. So I think that has a lot to do with that.  Figure 7: Exterior of Kelsie’s school 2 She continued to shoot the exterior as she described her impressions of the school as closed off. The newer section of the school that had been built after a section burned down used metal window covering after school hours to prevent vandalism, creating an industrial and lonely feel. She closed the film on a long shot of a garden that memorialized the loss of four students in a car accident. She discussed this tragedy and the impact that it had had on the community and the school, but she was relieved to see that the memorial was still there. 	   	   61	   In Kelsie’s second film, where she responded to the school as an installation and one that specifically intended to teach, she focused primarily on two areas of the school. The first area was a mock-up of a traditional nostalgic living room scene at Christmas, installed at the front of her school. In this portion of her film, Kelsie narrated as she filmed, which created a distinctly different feel to the way in which she approached the school space.  Figure 8: Kelsie’s second film: a conversation area Kelsie spent a significant amount of time in the centre of the arrangement, composed of a Christmas tree and three couches in a conversational setting. During this part of her film, Kelsie described the way the setting would allow a feeling of community, but that in the closed-off setting only particular interactions were available. She pointed out that the paper in the background covered up the art hung at the front of the school, and she described the types of interactions that she thought this might create. Both during the film and during the dialogue section, Kelsie narrated the scene in what seemed like a specific response to the prompt to engage with the school as an installation. As she moved in the space, she considered what 	   	   62	  relationships were possible or could be provoked by this scenario, including the responses of those who do not celebrate Christmas or might find the presence of a Christmas tree in a public school segregating and perhaps disrespectful of multiple traditions. The film and her narration lacked the personal memories or responses that she had included in the previous work and seemed contrived in order to respond directly to the prompt.   In the second section of the film, Kelsie returned to the former digital and film photography room. When I asked why she chose to go back there, she explained: I feel like it has a lot of importance in my mind. It takes… When I think of the school, that’s the room I think of, because I spent so much time there. I was there in class during school, probably for two… at least two blocks a day. It was a six-block system, and then also after school Tuesdays and Thursdays to work on the yearbook, for quite a long time. So I would say that room is where I spent the most of my time. And there used to be computers in there, and so that’s… we were there working on the yearbook and different digital projects. And so I guess maybe the friendships I had in there, the memories associate that with a good feeling. So it’s kind of common to go in there, but then at the same time, it’s changed so much, and that’s disruptive to those memories.  As Kelsie continued to discuss this room—including the changes, the disruption to her memories and the sadness that resulted from these changes—she mentioned that her mom had come with her to film the school. Her mom had attended the same school and followed Kelsie as she filmed various spaces, pointing out the pictures of family members who had also attended the school. She and her mom moved through the school, looking at places that they both remembered. As I watched the second film and listened to Kelsie discuss the work, there was a distinct qualitative difference between the first and second films. Initially I felt that this was so because the second visit produced fewer surprises and perhaps Kelsie knew what to look for; while this might have been part of it, other factors, including being accompanied by her mom 	   	   63	  and the prompt itself, created an alternate engagement with the space. When I asked her what was different from the last time, she described that she had gone later than usual, and that the prompt was really difficult to think about. This time I went later. I went around 7:00, and the school was still open because they have band concerts and gym things. So the custodian was able to open the door for me, because my mom knows him. [laughs] But… So I was able… I went into less rooms, but I didn’t want to go into those academic rooms. I thought, like, I wanted to focus on the main areas and the art, that one art classroom, to kind of hone it down a little bit. The first time it was kind of a general, “Oh, let’s check out the school again.” And then this time it was more focused and that. I was trying to think of different areas of… with your question in mind, the installation. But it was a hard question. It was really hard to think of the school in that way, just because it feels so structured and there’s not much room for flexibility within the school.   In the first film, Kelsie’s plan to film particular sites in the school in response to the prompt shifted as she returned to the school, and memories and spaces that had not previously resonated with her formed the majority of the images she shot. The conditions that allowed her attentiveness extended from memories that formed during the return rather than from the plan she had formulated prior to the return. The understandings that emerged from this attentiveness were significant in that the aesthetic choices that Kelsie used in those moments when memories emerged provoked her consideration of what she valued as a teacher; most significant was sustaining the history of the place to create a community in the classroom that valued past contributions and art forms rather than erasing them. As she considered where she had learned in this place and what this space taught, she found that rather than becoming dormant, space continued to teach. This included her perceptions of the absence or pending absence of her presence in the school. This perpetual absence, whether it was her artwork, the artwork of 	   	   64	  friends, the smell of the art materials or the absence of spaces where she had made art, continued to inform her memories and perceptions of what she valued in teaching art.  While Kelsie identified that she was unable to consider the school as an installation because it was so structured and lacked flexibility, her response suggests that the design and interaction with the space as an installation was consistent with its overall purpose. Kelsie identified the prompt as a question and one that needed to be discovered and resolved. She made fewer connections to her own response and memories to place and instead moved through the school to respond to the space rather than create new understandings of it. Throughout the second dialogue session, Kelsie did not discuss a surprise, an insight or a disruption to her perceptions of the school space or her own understandings, as she had in the first film. She also did not choose to use filters or edits, as she had in the first round of film. Her work took on a more calculated and purposeful feel than it had in the first, as she filmed areas that seemed to provide documentary support of her narration. In Chapters 3 to 5, I will analyze and discuss these observations as they relate to pedagogy and research with teacher candidates. 	   	   65	  Christen  Figure 9:Christen’s interior stairwell As Christen viewed her film, she described the feelings of returning to the school and the uncomfortable nature of no longer belonging there. Unlike Kelsie, she returned to the school for the first film before classes were finished for the day. She hesitated to film as students were watching her, and she felt that they recognized that she did not belong. She remained at the front of the school until the majority of the students and staff had left for the day. I asked Christen whether she had felt this particular way when first entering her practicum school. She said that she had not, primarily because during the practicum, she had a purpose for being in the school, whereas in this instance, she was unsure of her reasoning for being there. Christen’s film began in one of the stairwells of her school. Initially, she held the camera below eye level, and she tilted the viewfinder so that she could see her film but also watch as she walked through the school. She did not narrate the film, and at points where she spoke to others in the school, Christen shut off the camera so the interactions were not recorded. She, like Kelsie, had returned to the school with a plan based on the prompts, but more than Kelsie, Christen’s 	   	   66	  film reflected multiple moments of unexpected responses; these became significant points for discussion as she viewed the film of her return both on her own and during the dialogue sessions. Christen said that she was unable to explain why she was moving to and filming particular sites, and so she took time to watch her film between giving me her footage and our meeting to discuss it. During these times, she wrote in her journal about what had occurred for her during the return. About a month after our first meeting, Christen emailed the following to me: So, what I am writing is things that came into my head at particular moments as I was walking around. As I was walking I would stop and linger if something triggered a memory or thought. Here goes: DSC_00319 -Walking up the stairs, the sounds brought me back to coming to class each morning, my heavy backpack -heading to my English classroom, a feeling of dread, feelings of embarrassment, frustration. -learning NOT to say “like” in every sentence and being ridiculed by the teacher in front of the class when I spoke up and used “like” -reading Lord of the Flies and feeling terrible about Piggy.  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  19 These codes correspond to the footage that Christen shot and were included so that I could locate the portion of film she was referring to. 	   	   67	   Figure 10: Christen’s close-up of stairs During the dialogue sessions, Christen discussed how she physically felt the memories of schooling more than simply recalling them. For Christen, the space, with its sounds and smells, produced the same feelings of hesitancy and anxiety that she had felt mounting those stairs when attending high school. We watched as Christen moved us, the viewers, through the stairwell in a slow trudge. In this instance, Christen’s film took on and produced trepidation as we slowly and laboriously moved up each stair. She focused on the stairs, and our eyes followed as she ascended to each floor of the school. She then left the stairwell and entered the hallways, with their similar lockers, linoleum floors, and black rubber baseboards. As Kelsie watched Christen’s film, she asked, Kelsie: When you remember, do you remember the space that you sat in or do you remember meeting the person? Christen: Uh, I remember, yeah, the physicality of being in there, and then from that, kind of events that happened. And I found a lot of times when I was seeing these rooms or whatever, I would have like a friendship would like show up and I’d be 	   	   68	  like, “Oh, this is where I met Jordan,” or, “This is where I met Diana,” and you kind of get a flash of that memory and what we were doing in that class and stuff like that. So…  Figure 11: Christen’s locker In her journal notes, Christen described this area as DSC_004 -walking down the halls towards my CAPP class, brought feelings of safety and comfort -remembering meeting one of my best friends (we are still close now), I remember feeling more confident, better about my self image -looking through the window I remember learning how to not be so concerned with what others thought of me, I had a good friend who made me feel good about myself. -paintings on the walls in the hall, remembering what it felt like the first time I experienced a death of a peer, Tula died on school property -learned how to cope with the loss and the idea that everything can be taken away in a moment -stop and pause at my old locker that i shared with my best friend, i remember secret notes and pictures we posted in there, the mirror she would always use to put on her makeup 	   	   69	  Like Kelsie, Christen’s most intense memories were found in the hallways of the school rather than the classrooms. The majority of the film that Christen shot was moving through the hallways as she looked for and found her high school locker. Christen described these mundane spaces as where memories of friendships and relationships were triggered. These memories were not ones that had been recalled prior to the return, and so in each instance of these memory triggers, Christen felt further compelled to return to unplanned areas of the building.  For over 20 minutes, the viewer accompanies Christen as she quietly walks the hallways of her school. At certain points, she pauses to look in various classrooms, but only briefly, and she does not offer any reason for doing so. These points for me produced anticipation that we were to learn something about Christen’s time in school, an event or important relationship, but she turned away from each doorway and continued down the hall. While we watched the film, I asked Christen whether she could describe the difference between being a student in the space and being an adult.  Christen: I think I just felt like a student again. Kelsie: [laughs] Adrienne: Oh, did you? Christen: [laughs] Yeah. I just felt like I was going back to class. It was strange. Adrienne: Really? Christen: Yeah. Kelsie: But I think mem-… I agree. I think memories have that powerfulness to just draw back in and to make you feel either big or small again—like “big” meaning that just you are very happy about that memory, or “small,” it wasn’t a great memory. So yeah. 	   	   70	  Christen: Yeah. Because it wasn’t a photo, like it wasn’t just me kind of like reminiscing, because I have lots of photos, but it was the sounds and everything like that that kind of triggered all of that I found, you know? Kelsie also described feeling as though she were a student, but more than embodying the memory as Christen had, Kelsie felt the power dynamic between herself and the principal whom she met in the hallway. Adrienne: What was it like when you bumped into… I know it probably wasn’t the same principal that you had… Kelsie: No. Adrienne: …but how do you feel when you meet a principal? Do you experience sort of the same relationship as high school or do you feel as though you’re meeting them as somebody who isn’t equal? Or how would you describe that? Kelsie: That, I found that interesting. I’m glad you brought that up, because I still felt like a student. [laughs] Christen: [laughs] Kelsie: So I think that has something to do with it too. So I wasn’t coming in with a clean slate. Adrienne: And how did you feel when you saw your principal or VP during practicum? Was it the same sensation going into a different school and meeting administration, or…? Christen: Umm, I don’t know. Yeah, I was kind of nervous, because I was like, “[gasps] This person…” But for a different reason, I guess, because when you’re a student, you’re like, “Oh, this person could get me in trouble” or whatever, but more along this line I was like, “This person might give me a job, so I have to behave really well.” [everyone laughs] So in both ways, you have to behave yourself, but it’s for different reasons. [laughs] As we watched Christen’s film and listened to her discussion of her embodied experience of the memory of school, Kelsie was able to discuss the power relationships that had been formulated during her time in school, and how these understandings remained as she went into her practicum 	   	   71	  school and during her return to her high school. Christen described the experience as more than reminiscing, more than looking at photographs of her high school years. The affective and sensorial experience of the return produced, for Christen, alternate memories of her time there. Bennett (2005) has argued that we cannot recall the sensorial or affective qualities of experience and that these types of responses can only be experienced rather than remembered. Christen’s discussion of the experience of the return as more than reminiscing suggests that alternate memories were produced in this return, and that through aesthetic choices produced in those moments, these memories were made visible to Christen during the dialogue sessions. The dialogue sessions then functioned as an opportunity for Christen to make sense of these memories but also created opportunities for Kelsie to consider her particular experience, the understandings about relationships that develop within the structure of the school, and the enduring nature of those relationships for her understandings of the place.  Christen’s film continued through the hallways and then quickly through her school gymnasium, cafeteria and more hallways until she reached her art classroom. The return to the classroom took on a different aesthetic than the somewhat generic previous shots of the gymnasium, cafeteria and random classrooms.  	   	   72	   Figure 12: Christen’s art classroom Christen’s film became more deliberate and focused as she lingered on details of the classroom. Similar to filming her locker, Christen spent time locating her physical imprint on the school while discussing the relationships that had formed. She entered her former art classroom and, standing in one spot, turned so that we could see the entirety of the space. Following this, she slowed her pace and took time filming many details of the classroom. In this section, we can see a bright yellow art room with multiple color wheels rendered in different materials, and wooden storage cabinets with labels written in black marker. She pans across what appears to be the ceramics area of the classroom, and we see glaze chips, bottles of glaze and brushes, as well as a mix of containers and bottles splattered with paint and stacked in cupboards. A large tile mosaic covers part of two walls.  	   	   73	   Figure 13: Edges of Christen’s painting under layers of paint At this point in the film, Christen zoomed in to a section of the wall painted a light yellow with a green board trim. The camera tried to locate the edges of the image to focus as she moved the camera around this patch of the wall.  In the dialogue session, Christen explained that she was looking for the painting that she had done when in school: Christen: This is our art room, yeah. So… Adrienne: And what grade did you go to this class, do you remember? Christen: Uh, 11/12, because I did 9 and 10 in the old one. So this is 11/12. It was brand new when we got in there, so now it’s a little worn down. Adrienne: Was it similar when you went to school there, or has it changed? Christen: Oh, it’s really, really cluttered now. I mean she was… the teacher we had was really… she wanted to get… immediately when we went in it was just white walls, and she was like, “Paint these walls.” Like she was just like, “It’s too sterile in here.” So we just covered the walls with painting and… What’s the word I’m looking for? Anyways, we put those ceramic tiles on the walls, and she let us 	   	   74	  basically have free rein of it. And we were like, “Are we sure we’re allowed to do this?” and she’s like, “Yeah, it’s my classroom.” So that’s all still there. And it was really nice because yeah, we got to make the art studio space ours. And now it has changed a little bit. Of course they can’t pick those pieces off the wall [laughs]—you’ll see up here—but they did paint over my big painting, so I was kind of sad. I expected it. I was like, “Oh, it’s probably not there,” but people kept telling me, “Oh, it’s still there, it’s still there.” And it’s supposed to be right here and now it just has, like, how-to posters on top. They didn’t even put another picture over top of it! So I tried to capture some of the brushstrokes that were still there. [laughs] In her writing journal, Christen described the art room and her experiences there as DSC_006 -the art room -learning in chaos -paint on paper, paint on walls, paint on bodies, glue things to the walls, make mistakes and don’t fix them -everything I was used to was flipped upside down. Loud music, messy classroom, thinking with your mind instead of your brain -this room allowed me to leave the rigidness of other subjects at the door -I used to have a mural in this classroom but it was painted over and now is covered with instructional papers...all that is left are my brushstrokes -learned how to reflect and look inside myself in this classroom  Christen’s second film, which responded to the school as an installation, had a similar feel as Kelsie’s in that it took on a more mechanical and contrived feel. 	   	   75	   Figure 14: Christen’s English classroom Adrienne: Were there any surprises to you, or was it, this is the rooms you wanted to go in? Christen: No, I don’t think there were… Yeah, I had really thought about which ones I wanted to go and experience, so I didn’t really have any surprises. Just the… like the alteration to some of the rooms that had happened, because I wasn’t… I didn’t go into them before, because I didn’t realize that they had kind of changed inside. That was the only surprise, I guess. Adrienne: Okay. Adrienne: So what made you pick this room, Christen? Christen: Well, this was one that I had known. This was an English… I had… a couple years in a row I had English in this classroom. So this is a familiar one, so I wanted to see how that kind of played out.  Like Kelsie, Christen seemed to find that the prompt to experience the school as an installation created a fundamentally different engagement with the space. One of the classrooms she chose to go into, the English classroom, was one that was very familiar. For Christen, this seemed to indicate that she would be comfortable enough in the space to explore how the design 	   	   76	  aspects made her feel. In this film, she narrated some areas of the classroom, and focused on the relationships that she developed. She commented on her memory of the teacher and that she did not feel as though she liked her, but in her grade 12 year, the same teacher had complimented her. Both Christen and Kelsie discussed how events such as the compliment could alter negative memories and change how the teacher was perceived in reflecting back on the events of the class.  Christen then moved from the English classroom into a science classroom and sat in a particular spot, as though it were one that she would pick if it had been her room. She panned around the classroom like a student. She narrated almost the entire time as she commented on the setup, noting that as a student, she would sit further back so that she had some anonymity in the classroom. She shot and narrated details in the classroom, but the space and the film had a very detached and impersonal feel. During our dialogue session, I noted this shift. Adrienne: So if somebody were to actually design this space, what do you think, if anything, their intention is? Christen: I don’t know. I feel like this space was really… like it wasn’t designed. It was designed for something else, and then they’re overlaying and overlaying. Like they’re just adding more and more to it instead of taking everything out and reconfiguring it. That’s kind of how I felt. Kelsie: That’s how I feel about the spaces too. I mean, now that I’ve been working on this with you, I’ve been thinking about the spaces that we learn in and our educational mind frame. And my practicum school is four years old, so they just built it, and there’s a lot more windows and that sort of thing. But it still is like that classroom, an older looking classroom with four walls. It’s still closed off, it’s… But that got me thinking, how… what is the optimal space to learn in? And the fact that you said they have layers and layers and they’re changing what they have, but they’re not changing it completely is kind of unsettling at the same time. [laughs] 	   	   77	  Christen: Yeah. Yeah, really unsettling. I was just like, which… where am I supposed to be looking, and where am I supposed to be sitting? Like it was just too… too much I think. Adrienne: Well, and I found in your first video that both of you kind of looked for yourselves in the school. Like you focused in on a detail of your painting that had been painted over, and you were looking at sort of the encroaching murals that were coming to paint over inevitably the mural that you had there. Kelsie: Yeah, that’s right. Change. Adrienne: But it seems for me, for both of you that there’s almost… like in your spaces you liked evidence and not omitted evidence, but clear evidence that people had been there before, and had had experiences, and that you could learn from those, versus sort of the white-washing of them to start all over again. So that’s one of the things that I was thinking, because… Christen: That’s funny, not to do with high school or anything, but when I came here and I was picking a locker, I was, like, kind of looking through them. I don’t know what I was looking for [laughs], but I was just opening them and checking them out. Like, “Which one should I choose?” And I picked one because it had this guy’s… he had written his timetable on it, and it was from 1999. And then he wrote on it, and he said, “You will be a great teacher. Good luck.” And then he wrote, “Ken, 1999.” And I was like [gasps]. And I just really liked that this is so old and it was like an encouraging piece of thing that he knew was going to be there and people were going to see it every year, and I was like, “This is going to be my locker.” So yeah, looking for that past was kind of important, I guess. I don’t know why, but… Both Christen and Kelsie indicated that the prompt changed their engagement with the space while it simultaneously made them consider the design of other educational spaces in their day-to-day lives as well as the decisions that they made in relation to the feel of a place. While the prompts were intended to provide an engagement with space that shifted from a particular narrative, it seemed as though they also provoked a certain relationship and experience of place that required a different type of thinking and meaning making. In these moments, for both 	   	   78	  Christen and Kelsie, the aesthetics of locating themselves in the space produced by the first prompt generated a personal and sensorial engagement, while the second was more in keeping with locating a particular response that might satisfy my own needs as a researcher. Rather than becoming attuned to the space through personal and evocative means, Christen and Kelsie sat in the space and wondered what about the space was significant. In doing so, both Christen and Kelsie provided a descriptive account of the relationships that had formed in some of the areas, but rather than memories of experiences or a sensorial affective provocation of memories, both participants instead imagined what might occur in particular spaces because of the design elements. This imagined response did not produce the types of surprises or considerations of what they valued in teaching or learning, as the first round of filming had produced. These two broad organizations of their films and responses will be considered in the following chapters. Conclusion 	   The films that Christen and Kelsie shot suggest that the relationship between the returns and the prompts produced very different experiences. The differences emerged through particular aesthetics that both used to communicate their returns. These aesthetic inscriptions of their memories, and their imagined responses to space, were made available to them during the discussion sessions, which each used to process further meaning from the returns. In the first return, both Christen and Kelsie looked to find their mark on the school, while in the second, they generated a more calculated response to the prompt. As an aesthetic inscription, the films documented mundane aspects of the school, including the hallways, lockers and classrooms. In these spaces, what might appear as mundane and generic content took on personal meaning as both Christen and Kelsie slowed their pace, zoomed in on particular aspects of the space and, most significantly, were unable to narrate the space. The narration of the experience occurred 	   	   79	  primarily during the dialogue sessions, where they noted surprises and disruptions that became rich sites for exploring their perceptions of teaching. The aesthetics of the second round of film also attended to mundane aspects of the school, yet both Christen and Kelsie were able to narrate the imagined aspects of what relationships or particular engagements would be taken up through the designed aspects of the school space, suggesting a very different type of engagement in their different returns. In the following chapters, I will take up these types of engagement and attentiveness in Christen and Kelsie’s films and consider the conditions that were made available for both participants to explore the school space, as well as the particular opportunities and types of meaning making that occurred. I will explore these conditions and meaning-making events to ascertain their potential in research and pedagogy with secondary visual-art teacher candidates.   	   	   80	   Chapter 3: Deterritorializing Time: Encounter and Montage in Research and Pedagogy Introduction   In this chapter, I explore my observations related to Christen’s and Kelsie’s films and dialogue sessions to consider the implications that their returns to and films of high school have for research and pedagogy with secondary visual-art teacher candidates. I will examine Christen’s and Kelsie’s responses to the prompts, the memories that emerged in their returns, and the aesthetic choices each made in their films, to understand how particular experiences and artistic practice may create opportunities for teacher candidates to encounter their perceptions of teacher practice. I argue that a shift from the conceptualization of time as linear to time as montage offers important insights into how teacher candidates learn through experience rather than from experience.   To conceptualize time as montage, the emphasis on the pedagogical value of practices such as reflecting on experience to learn from might be displaced by the creation of experiences whereby teacher candidates might learn through experience. This distinction may initially seem semantic and insignificant. However, in Christen’s and Kelsie’s cases, I found that the returns and the prompts provoked two particular types of experiences: those that were activated by intense affect and those that drew on imagination and intellect rather than affective intensity. These conditions provoked the participants to describe their memories and perceptions of being in school and teacher practice as either affirmed or disrupted. The memories and perceptions that emerged in the moments of affective intensity provided opportunities for individuated understandings rather than those that affirmed more generic understandings of schooling.  	   	   81	  While reflecting on the object of experience to inform the future performance of the teacher as a projection (see Connelly & Clandinin, 1990; Schön, 1983, 1987) is a common method perceived to improve teacher practice, for Christen and Kelsie learning through experience in the virtual interstices of past, present and future (Deleuze, 1990) offered unique and individuated perceptions of teacher practice. I argue that in the returns to school, Christen and Kelsie made distinct aesthetic choices during their filmmaking of their returns. Their films constituted rich sites through which to explore their return, memories and perceptions of schooling and teacher practice. These films and dialogue sessions suggest the potential of both research and pedagogy to engage in enacting experiences to understand how and where memories of schooling form and how they may become amenable to change. This suggests that memory and perceptions are dynamic rather than static, and might allow for memories and desires, for teacher practice to be inhabited in the present. Teacher candidates might thereby engage in a form of embodied inquiry that points to types of events, memories, desires and experiences that have shaped their perceptions; rather than leaving those perceptions stable, experience would serve to destabilize them, creating opportunities for new understandings.  For Deleuze (1991) this conceptualization of experience is encapsulated by his work on Bergson’s (1998) understandings of intuition. Drawing on these understandings, I argue that instead of supplanting one form of teaching for another, research and pedagogy could look to intuition described by Deleuze (1991) and Grosz (2004) for the creation of the conditions to think to gain insights into alternate potentials of research and pedagogy. Discussed further in Chapter 5, intuition is enacted as both a product of knowledge and a disposition that forms when affective experience disrupts the composites of experience, memory and perception (Semetsky, 2004). In this process, intuition becomes a way to destabilize given and normative meaning as it 	   	   82	  seeks to form new meaning in both perceptions and memories. Semetsky (2010) described this intuition as perception in becoming as affect or “perceiving something that is not given” (p. 449) to reflect the dynamic nature of understandings that remain amenable to change through experience and affect. The concept of becoming suggests that rather than fixed and knowable, knowing and knowledge are fluid and shifting. Intuition as both knowing and knowledge inherent in becoming (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987) also positions the concept of identity, such as teacher, as always in process, always becoming, rather than fixed and knowable. The conceptualization of time as montage enables a novel approach to understanding experience, memory and perception and the potential implications of intuition for pedagogical practices with secondary visual-art teacher candidates, as well as the arts-based forms of educational research. Potentials and Problems: Christen’s and Kelsie’s Films From and Through Experience Designing the Prompts   At the onset of this research, I designed the prompts to shift the participants’ practices from learning from experience to learning through experience. This shift notes that “from experience” involves looking back as recollections and looking towards as future desires for practice positioning experience as an object of reflection or projection. In either state, perceptions tend to remain intact rather than destabilized so that alternate understandings might occur (Jackson & Mazzei, 2012; Massumi, 2002, 2011). “Through experience” instead engages with processes of looking away through an embodied experience. Time is experienced as montage, wherein generative connections form as past and future are lived and re-made in the present. In the previous chapter, I argued that various processes of narration that rely on recollection and memory shape the narrative through a cohesion with dominant discourses of teaching, thereby sustaining and reifying normative perceptions of practice. I sought to disrupt 	   	   83	  this process by prompting Christen and Kelsie to learn through a particular type of experience, which aimed to activate memory and desire in and through the embodied rather than the recollected return.   Numerous arts-based and art-education scholars have indicated that through particular art practices, alternate understandings and meanings of events might emerge (Garoian, 2010, 2013; Irwin, 2006; Irwin & O’Donoghue 2012; O’Donoghue 2007, 2010; Springgay, 2011; Sullivan, 2010). Garoian (2010) found, for example, that the act of forcibly recalling his childhood memory of witnessing the atomic bomb detonation “kept him further in the dark . . . It was only after I stopped trying to remember and averted my focus to this writing project that the nuances of what I witnessed that day came to mind mnemonically” (p. 183). For Garoian (2010), the inquiry through writing into the Event of the detonation of an atomic bomb suggests how the insights and revelations that art practice and research make possible challenge socially and historically constructed ways of seeing and understanding and, in doing so, constitute the immanent and generative learning processes of prosthetic visuality. (p. 183) The prosthetic visuality of both art practice and research to which Garoian refers expresses the potential of each to enable a type of seeing that is in excess of the visual and the physiological act of seeing. For Garoian (2010), the process of writing enabled alternate and nuanced understandings of the atomic bomb detonation. This shift in focus away from the detonation itself towards an alternate project avoided a process that required a forcible recall of the event of the detonation, while simultaneously enabling an alternate way of coming to see and know the event. 	   	   84	  Drawing on this potential for prosthesis as an excess of visuality, I designed prompts to explore if the process of embodied affective inquiry, might allow alternate memories and understandings to emerge. I was unsure of how either participant would create the film of their return, yet I anticipated that the interplay of the prompt, the filming, the return and memory might create the potential for re-inscribing memories with new meanings. I designed the prompts so that they would not require participants to forcibly remember their time in school, or involve the participants in a process of moral cohesion, alluded to by Butler (2005), or lead them to produce a narrative of cohesion of teaching, as described by Ricoeur (1992).   While I designed the prompts with these intentions, the ways in which Christen and Kelsie initially engaged with the prompts began with processes that I describe as more representational of normative and generalized understandings of school and teacher practices. This initial response formed as they prepared for the return by the selection and shaping of their memories of experience through their interpretations of my expectations. While Christen’s and Kelsie’s responses to the second prompt (installation) occurred during their return, their processes of responding to the prompt were carried out in a similar fashion to the initial response to the first prompt (pedagogical value of space), as they attempted to respond in order to answer the prompt as though it were a problem requiring a resolution. Deleuze and Guattari (1987) described the processes of conformity and sameness as territorialization, and in the following section, I explore particular conditions that I suggest worked to territorialize Christen’s and Kelsie’s responses to the return and thus the understandings that were recalled through those conditions.  	    	   	   85	  The Prompts and the Territorialization of Memory   The ways through which Kelsie and, more so, Christen engaged with the prompts initially territorialized their inquiry, as they interpreted the prompt through their perceptions of my expectations. This initial response to the prompts drew on their memory and recollection of schooling, initiated prior to the return. Prior to the physical return, both Christen and Kelsie indicated that they had recalled specific school experiences and began to assemble a plan of where they wanted to shoot film in the schools to capture these places of memory; they pictured various spaces that they felt would best correspond to the somewhat abstract nature of the prompt. Initially, they spoke about the desire to correctly respond to the prompt by fully exploring the pedagogical value of the school space.  Adrienne: Did you find that you were thinking about what the research was for and trying to adapt your film in that way? Christen: Yeah. Like… Well, I think I was. I mean I was trying to get something that would be valid and useful [as to what I was thinking, so then I was like, “Ah, I don’t know what to say that would correspond to [what really…]“ Without having returned to the school, both participants drew on their cognitive memory and recollection of schooling. These were memories that functioned as significant events in their schooled lives and were easily accessible through reflecting. Both Christen and Kelsie discussed their plan to return to certain classrooms where significant events had occurred during their time in high school. These memories, more than others, shaped their initial responses to the first prompt (pedagogical value of space).   Christen’s and Kelsie’s responses to the second prompt (installation), while similar to their initial responses to the first prompt (pedagogical value of space), were somewhat unique in the sense that rather than memory or recollection, both Christen and Kelsie imagined what type 	   	   86	  of learning would occur in a particular place. Certainly memory and recollection informed this imagined response, but the quality of the ways in which they formed their understandings drew less on their memories, primarily because both participants had not been in the particular spaces they shot to respond to the second return. Kelsie, for example, imagined what type of interaction and conversation would occur in the Christmas vignette at the front of the school, and Christen imagined what type of learning would occur in the science room. Rather than attending to their own bodies and embodiment in space or their affective response to a particular classroom, both Christen and Kelsie sought to respond to and answer the prompt through various assumptions. While this imagined learning drew on their previous knowledge of learning in similar school spaces and classrooms, their discussion of the school space was not produced from an element of surprise or curiosity that emerged through their experience of the space, as was the case with their response to the first return. Instead, both participants identified particular spaces inside the schools and spoke of what might be possible for learning and interaction in this space without locating their own understandings through experience.   Their discussion of these spaces during the dialogue session was also different from their discussion of the first physical return in that it seemed the response was to answer the problem of the prompt. By this I mean that rather than drawing on the experience to form connections to memories and perceptions as well as new experiences and understandings, the nature of the second prompt (installation) seemed to compel a response to solve a problem rather than to explore the potential of the space. Both participants indicated that the prompt to experience the school as an installation was difficult to understand and that they wanted to provide a response that I would find useful. Rather than drawing on their physical experience of the space, the participants drew on their imagination of what learning would occur in vignettes of the school 	   	   87	  conceptualized as an installation. This process of desiring a correct or accurate solution or answer may point to the ways in which framing problems tends to shape and territorialize possible conditions for learning and the understandings generated in this process. It may also suggest that even with abstracted problems, in the form of prompts, Christen and Kelsie drew on memory not to create alternate possibilities, but to recall and represent their educational experiences, in a desire to produce responses that met their perception of my expectations. While their representations provided insight into their understandings of the space, it was the first return that provoked a form of inquiry that drew on their highly individuated and unexpected responses to the return. These experiences took on different aesthetic qualities in their films and were what provoked a discussion and consideration of their understandings of teacher practice during the dialogue sessions. Experiencing the Return   Christen’s and Kelsie’s responses to the prompts and the return offer insight into how researchers’ and pedagogues’ experiences may provoke a disruption to perceptions of practice in both teacher education research and pedagogy. Teacher education is often involved with developing expectations that certain problems (e.g., classroom and time management) and challenges (e.g., curriculum planning and assessment) exist and that their solutions can be found through course work and practicum experience. While my research does not suggest that these issues are unrelated to teaching, the framing of these expectations alongside problems associated with poor or less successful teaching implicates teacher education and research in pedagogy as a discovery of approved capacities to act and a territorialization of inquiry and knowledge (Britzman, 2003; Deleuze & Guattari, 1987). This process suggests that (1) problems pre-exist the context of their emergence, independently sustaining normative processes of schooling, and 	   	   88	  (2) these problems are solvable, and the teacher candidate’s responsibility becomes discovering these solutions and making the pre-existing solutions visible to themselves. This visibility does not imply a new or creative thought but the unearthing or uncovering of that which is already knowable about what it means to be an effective teacher. If we consider Christen’s and Kelsie’s initial responses and their responses to the second prompt (installation) as indicative of this process, then we must also consider the extent to which the experiences of reflection and problem solving create opportunities for teacher candidates to disrupt or sustain their own normative and tacit perceptions of practice.    Processes of reflection and problem solving suggest that in many ways, what is best for teacher practice is a known entity, and so the process of becoming a teacher is a process of sanctioned skill acquisition (Britzman, 2003). This form of teacher training rather than education requires candidates to work within majoritarian discourses of education as well as those of teacher education (Britzman, 2003), instead of provoking opportunities for new considerations and understandings. Arguably, as these qualities of the effective teacher are made visible through various process—including narrative accounts of experience, reflection and recollections of good and bad teacher practice—tacit formations of teacher practices are reified, occluding opportunities to design or create other potentialities of teaching and consequently territorializing both the process and the products of knowing.  While the initial response to the first prompt (pedagogical value of space) to plan the sites of the return was produced through memory and recollection, the first physical return to the school and the engagement with the first prompt (pedagogical value of space) produced what I would characterize as learning through experience. Once Christen and Kelsie arrived at their respective schools, memories drawn out of the affective sensory response to place shifted their 	   	   89	  attention from the consciousness of the space and time of their plan towards a mode of affective inquiry.  Adrienne: How about you? Did you find that there was anything unexpected going back, particularly because you had been in there not too long ago? Kelsie: Umm, well, I found it… I guess mainly the photo room and the yearbook room, that was unexpected, and the feeling that I had towards it was unexpected, because I mean I spent a lot of time in that space, so I guess that association. And I didn’t think I would have a reaction to certain hallways, but I did, and I guess that’s the connotation with whatever subject it was. If I didn’t like that subject, then I kind of went, Uh… Adrienne: Yeah. [laughs] Kelsie: That was really interesting. Adrienne: Yeah, that is interesting with the hallways. Because you think about not a lot of your formal education tends to occur in hallway spaces. You’re generally moving from one to the other.  So what was it like being back as an adult versus a student? Like, do you remember having those same sort of sensations or responses when you were a student, or is it something that you feel as an adult? Christen: I think I just felt like a student again. Kelsie: [laughs] Adrienne: Oh, did you? Christen: [laughs] Yeah. I just felt like I was going back to class. It was strange. Adrienne: Really? Christen: Yeah. Kelsie: But I think mem-… I agree. I think memories have that powerfulness to just draw back in and to make you feel either big or small again—like “big” meaning that just you are very happy about that memory, or “small,” it wasn’t a great memory. So yeah. 	   	   90	  Christen: Yeah. Because it wasn’t a photo, like it wasn’t just me kind of like reminiscing, because I have lots of photos, but it was the sounds and everything like that that kind of triggered all of that I found, you know?  While this conversation was noted in Chapter 2, it is worth repeating here to point to how Christen experienced a difference between what she describes as reminiscing through photos and the physical experience of the return. Christen’s discussion of reminiscing is poignant, as she makes a distinction between the experience of drawing on the visual for reminiscing and the embodied experience of the return. She points to the ways that the sensory engagement triggered all that she found in the return, which triggered new discoveries. Bennett (2012) argued:  While the image embodies the surface and materiality of the event, it sheds the specific details of its incarnation . . . hence, we can choose to consider the event by going over the course of the event, recording its effectuation, conditioning, deterioration in history—or by reassembling the event, inhabiting it and going through all its components. (p. 40) For Christen, this return and the sounds of the school shifted the focus of the process from reminiscing and became an opportunity for what Garoian (2013) refers to as a slippage of perception. The prompts that initially drew on memory and recollection—or as Christen described, reminiscing—instead provoked a diversion from Christen’s pre-planned narrative of experience by allowing for other ways of looking, as looking away through the body. What became present were alternate memories of experience provoked through a more-than-visual sensory engagement in space.  Adrienne: What do you think triggers the memory? Is it the sight of these places or the smell or the sounds or…? Christen: A lot of it was the sight and the sounds. 	   	   91	  Kelsie: Yeah. Christen: It was like my feet walking when I was like going up the stairs, that was instant as soon as I started hearing that, and I was like “[exhales],” I could remember like having my super-heavy backpack and walking up. And then, yeah, same thing like as I was going up to that top floor, first thing it was always this English class and it was terrible. And yeah, it was really wild just experiencing that, so… [laughs] Kelsie: For me, it was mostly the sight of different things or areas, because everything is designated to an area—there’s a math area, a socials, a science, and then the art. But it was also memories of what wasn’t there, or what wasn’t there now, and then your memories replacing it with what it used to be for you. And for me, that was especially in the photography room because it’s changed so much, and it was really saddening to see. Christen referred to not simply remembering the anxiety of moving up the stairs of the school, but the production of affect felt as anxiety in the return to the spaces of schooling. The prompts created the potential for the school to be produced as something other than a setting for their recollections and narrative account. It was not until they were present in their schools, engaging in a sensory recall, that the prompts participated in the psychical opportunity to look away from that which they were directly considering—their dominant memories and stories of schooling—and to engage in a sensory exploration of memory.  As O’Sullivan (2006) has argued, “We might say that the story-telling aspect is art’s signifying aspect whereas the creative aspect is art’s asignifying potential” (p. 47). The prompts, the return to the school, the embodied experience of sensory engagement and the production of a film produced a creative engagement with place. This asignifying potential was produced through affect, which disrupted their expectations of place and of finding a response to the prompts. More than the participants’ dominant memories, Christen’s and Kelsie’s films reflected a return to the mundane rather than the significant events initially recalled. They attended to the hallways and their lockers more than to the classrooms they had attended. They located marks 	   	   92	  they had made in the school space as well as the absences created through their artworks’ removal or through the processes of their traces being covered over. Their return and artwork developed connections between their memories and future desires for teaching that did not reveal or uncover understandings but potentially created conditions to explore memories distinct from those activated by recollection.  The return, including the prompts, discussions and filmmaking, offered an alternate purpose for going back to their schools. Rather than performing one of the official roles, including those of teachers, staff and students, Christen’s and Kelsie’s returns allowed for an artistic engagement and exploration of place. This experience, discussed in more detail in Chapter 4, is constituted by the virtual intersection of affection and perception within the durational event of schooling. In this durational or montage experience of time, Christen’s and Kelsie’s affective responses contracted time as they lived and experienced memories of schooling in the present moment. These experiences were located in the hallways, the stairwells, within the non-places of education, where informal learning occurred in transition from one explicit element of schooling to the next.   As both Christen and Kelsie moved through their schools, memories were provoked through a sensory exploration of the spaces. This shifted their attention and desire away from responding to the prompts through recollection and reflection, as they experienced memories activated through sensory engagement. In these moments, the potential to reinhabit the memory of schooling through an embodiment of the mundane sensory aspects of place offered alternate memories of the experience of schooling, creating momentary disruptions in the edifice of the narrative of teacher, student teacher and/or student, and suggesting the potential to destabilize other narratives. 	   	   93	  Recounting the Return: The Dialogue Sessions and the Production of Meaning   Following each return, Christen, Kelsie and I met to discuss their films. As alluded to earlier, O’Sullivan’s (2006) assertion that art is composed of a story-telling aspect suggests a form of engagement to signify meaning. Art’s creative asignifying potential and the signifying aspect are not mutually exclusive, but form, as O’Sullivan argues, a complex assemblage. The dialogue sessions created an additional site for both group and individual production of alternate meanings through language and enactment within the group dialogue through story-telling and creative engagement with their films. Having watched their films in their absence, I had had an opportunity to develop initial understandings of their work, many of which were disrupted as I watched and discussed the films with the participants during the dialogue sessions. Because of the films’ lack of narration, I did not understand, for example, the extent to which Christen felt rather than recalled the return to the stairwells, nor the anxiety produced in returning to such a transitional space. Interestingly, that portion of the film activated, for me, a sense of anxiety, as it showed a slow march up a stairwell in what seemed to be almost an anticipatory or foreboding style.  For Christen, though, the discussion of this aspect of her film began a description of the production of anxiety but also a shift in her perceptions related to the teacher and the English class, which she felt had caused her to experience this anxiety. She described having felt disliked by the teacher, yet as she recalled other memories activated in the school space, she remembered the teacher describing her in supportive and positive ways. During the sessions, we watched the films, engaged in their narratives produced in the moments of return, and reread those narratives as a group through the play of dialogue. In the dialogue sessions, the films functioned as works of art, both in the participants’ explicit identification of their films as artworks and in the ways 	   	   94	  that O’Donoghue (2007) has argued that “[a] piece of work is not only produced by the artist, but is endlessly produced and reproduced by all those who come in contact with it for different purposes” (p. 64). As works of art, their films were not didactic or instructive but did possess qualities that incited particular modes of engagement and formations of meaning. I describe these qualities as the aesthetics of becoming, to express the distinction between the classical aesthetics of representational works and the aesthetics of artwork generated in moments of affective intensity, which may be produced by—and subsequently produce opportunities for—alternate forms of perceptions and understandings in the making and remaking of the work. Art Practice and Reinhabiting Memory: Intuition and the Aesthetics of Becoming 	   As Christen and Kelsie viewed their films, the processes of meaning making were connected to the aesthetic choices made in their films. This does not suggest a form of prescriptive or formulaic aesthetics that contain universal, recognizable markings. Rather, the aesthetic of becoming marks those moments of individuated and affective responses to place—for Christen, in the stairwells and hallways, and in front of her covered painting, and for Kelsie, in the presence of the absent photography room and the hallways. These were the areas where neither participant narrated their experience, and each alluded to her inability to process the meaning of the return. Instead, each explored the site based on a form of inquiry produced through an affective and sensory response to space. This mode of inquiry departed from the official script of the return that both had initially planned and instead responded in the emergence of embodied memory. As both Christen and Kelsie watched their films, the portions that captured their affective responses became rich sites for meaning making, as each explored the meaning of those particular experiences. Mediated by language, including Christen’s experience of “weird” and Kelsie’s experience of “sadness”, we explored the films, the aesthetic 	   	   95	  choices, the experience of the return, the memories of what was and was not there, and what this meant to each person.   As Kelsie considered the sadness that she experienced in the loss of the photography room, she began to consider her responses to the other school spaces during the return. Again and again, the importance of community in the school and classroom emerged as she attended to her memories of school space, particularly those of absence: Kelsie: I feel that if you have things on the wall, not necessarily stuffed animals, but it makes it feel more homey and more like a community, and the students have participated in putting or having that work there. And I mean with this one, this room, the painting and drawing, it’s a lot emptier than it used to be, and even though it still looks cluttered, it’s more about materials and less about the students. So I think… I don’t know. It’s interesting because that’s the change in teacher, because it’s a different teacher in there now. So yeah, I guess that’s something I didn’t realize about myself. Kelsie considered the space of education and commented: Kelsie:  I’m thinking of my practicum school. It’s very new. There’s nothing on the walls. It feels kind of cold, but maybe that’s… Then I’m thinking why does that feel cold to me? Maybe it doesn’t feel cold to someone else.  For Christen: Kelsie: When you remember, do you remember the space that you sat in, or do you remember meeting the person? Christen: Uh, I remember, yeah, the physicality of being in there, and then from that, kind of events that happened. And I found a lot of times when I was seeing these rooms or whatever, I would have like a friendship would like show up and I’d be like, “Oh, this is where I met Jordan,” or “This is where I met Diana,” and you kind of get a flash of that memory and what we were doing in that class and stuff like that. So… Adrienne: So you find it was the relationships that triggered memories? Christen: Yeah. 	   	   96	   This departure from their initial plan of filming suggests a type of inquiry that Deleuze and Guattari (1987) referred to as nomadic, as I have already mentioned. In this sense, the nomad moves throughout a territory, expanding the borders, as they break up the internal homogeneity of the territory. Similarly, in Kafka (1986), Deleuze and Guattari explored the minoritarian as a minor language, such as Yiddish, which emerged in a confluence of the marginalized and dominant languages of Hebrew and German, respectively. The emergence of Yiddish deterritorialized but did not eradicate the dominant German by creating a passageway through dominant meanings. The concept of the nomad and the minoritarian are useful for considering how both Christen’s and Kelsie’s affective inquiries offered minoritarian resistance in the dominant discourses and movements within a school space, as the process of affective and artistic inquiry produces smooth rather than striated spaces. This creates the opportunity for movements that respond to the sensorial and affective memory, resisting dominant or normative understandings. As Conley (2005) argued, “Minoritarian authors are those who are foreigners in their own tongue” (p. 164), in that their processes of meaning making disrupt majoritarian understandings. In Cinema 2, Time Image, Deleuze explored this concept further through minor cinema. According to Verevis (2005), a minor cinema does not represent the oppressed “but rather anticipates a people yet to be created, a consciousness to be brought into existence” (p. 166). It does not maintain a distinction between private and public; instead, it merges “the personal with the social to make it immediately political” (p. 166).   Through artistic, sensory and affective inquiry, Christen and Kelsie performed as minoritarian filmmakers by inscribing an aesthetic of becoming through processes of territorialization in the initial response deterritorialization through affective inquiry, and reterritorialization through the conversion of their affective response of the return into meaning 	   	   97	  mediated through language. Christen and Kelsie as minoritarians destabilized meaning even as they sought to create meaning through processes of movement and creative acts pursued in the return and through their films. The performance of the minoritarian of education and teacher practice, through art practice, offers insight into the complexity of the destabilization and new meaning making within the dominant, majoritarian event of schooling. As Christen and Kelsie pursued alternate explorations of the school—those not linked specifically to the role of teacher or student—they inscribed their films with the aesthetics of becoming. This minoritarian form of inquiry is significant for the emergence of the intensity of the mundane for both Christen and Kelsie.  This nomadic form of inquiry provoked by the sensorial experience suggests immanence as a highly individuated mode of inquiry, which allowed the emergence of the significance of the mundane to the experience of schooling as well as the potential to provoke new and creative thought. I argue that rather than documenting the experience so that it might be brought back for critique, the artistic practices of play (Massumi, 2002) in the encounter offer a critique of the authority of the visual and suggest alternate modes of engagement that extend the “wholeness” of the visual and the entanglement of the body in the materiality of creating.   In those moments when affect disrupted perceptions through a slippage in the meaning, Christen’s and Kelsie’s films became intertwined in their affective response to place, and simultaneously recorded their movement and affective inquiry of places as well as creating a text for further exploration in processes of meaning making, during the dialogue sessions. This inscription of affect, produced as mundane and silent, created opportunities for the participants to explore their affective responses and to produce other meanings mediated by language. Their film and aesthetics of becoming, position each film as: 	   	   98	  a bundle of affects . . . a block of sensations. It is also what art does, that is produces affects. Indeed, you can’t “read” affects in this sense, you can only experience them. Which brings us to the whole crux of the matter: experience. (O’Sullivan, 2006, p. 43) These understandings were developed in a discussion of the distinction of art through aisthesis, as Rancière (2013) explored silent cinematic work and the role of the camera in cinema. He argued: The “movements” of cinema define an art insofar as they transform distances and modes of perception, forms of development, and the very feeling of time. These perceptual distortions are not made possible by the camera’s resources and montage tricks alone. These tricks remain technical performances that impose the artist’s skills onto the machine’s capacity. (p. 193) Rather than montage tricks, I argue that Christen’s and Kelsie’s films are processes of embodied montage as the simultaneous existence of past, present and future. This concept of the embodiment of montage suggests that artistic practices may enable what Deleuze (1991) referred to as the virtual, as the living of memories and future desires in the present. As a prosthetic to the body, the camera formed a contiguous relationship with the participants, inhering the aesthetics of becoming as a stylistic of their embodied montage of the return. Grossman (2013) argued that the material and sensorial processes of experiencing memory and desire in the real are impossible to depict through images alone; but she suggested that film has the potential to invite a form of participation that allows the spectator—in this case, Christen and Kelsie—to experience the affective sensation. This is not a universal, inherent quality of the film per se, but it activates particular memories and future desires in the present as a montage of time. 	   	   99	   O’Sullivan (2006) explored this stylistic through the concept and categorization of art as “the name of an interaction or an encounter, the effect of one body on another” (p. 52), but explored the work of Deleuze and Guattari to articulate what it is “that constitutes art ‘beyond’ its existence as brute matter” (p. 53). O’Sullivan pointed to the term style as this decisive turn that organizes matter into art “to raise lived perceptions to the percept and lived affections to the affect” (p. 53). Massumi (2002) argued that style is what differentiates and elevates the play of players in a particular game. It is what makes their participation distinct from that of those who become competent in the official rules of the game. Style, then, is the aesthetic of the minoritarian that cuts through and destabilizes official competencies.  Christen and Kelsie responded to the individuated aesthetic inscription of meaning as a style, during the dialogue about their films. Similar to auteur theory, this inscription of meaning or aesthetic of becoming suggests that the filmmaker may produce, in film, a creative concept, which provokes meaning to form—for the participant as well as others in the dialogue sessions. In terms of my research, this mark or concept is not contained or within the work, but it may offer a “bundle of percepts and affects to viewers, including the filmmaker who produced the work, as an expression of a specific world-view (O’Sullivan, 2006, p. 55).   In the production of film through play (Massumi, 2002) and affective inquiry, participants offer an individuated experience of place by drawing their virtual into the frame of the shot through affective inquiry and the aesthetic of becoming. For Kennedy (2004), film offers this exploration as a mind/body/machine meld, as experience, as sensation, as a perception-consciousness formation. (p. 5). For O’Sullivan (2006), the 	   	   100	  artist [is] a composition of percepts and affects brought together in a certain rhythm. Artists are those who add these new varieties or compounds of affects to the world, they are the makers of new rhythms . . . the production of other possible worlds. (p. 54–55) From this perspective, Christen’s and Kelsie’s films were potentially provoked by and may continue to provoke an encounter with schooling. They are not a self-evident moving image, tracing this engagement; instead, they actively participate in the deterritorialization of the school space and in the intuitive impulse as a movement through and mapping of connections formed in the encounter with the school space. For the dialogue sessions, the films created an opportunity to form meanings of the encounter and to activate further provocations to inhabit the school space, creating an alterity of understanding.   While I noted that the initial response to the first prompt (pedagogical value of space) and the embodied response to the second prompt (installation) tended to territorialize both their explorations and their understandings of school spaces, their first return to the school space and their dialogue formed around the aesthetics of becoming activated opportunities to consider their perceptions of teaching. The return to school, as a creative act, precipitated a process of montage as Christen and Kelsie experienced memories of schooling, lived in the present through an embodied sensory engagement with place. Similar to processes of artistic creation, the outcomes of the research and artwork are less prescribed and instead emerge through multiple decisions made during the process.   Christen’s and Kelsie’s return and filmmaking as a response to the prompts and memories in and of place created an alternate engagement with the space through time as montage. As minoritarian filmmakers, Christen and Kelsie pursued a form of inquiry that at once acknowledged the official and political nature of the school while also destabilizing its authority 	   	   101	  to guide their affective inquiry. Christen and Kelsie offered a minoritarian perspective of schooling, which (like that of many contemporary artists) points to how places are socially and politically inscribed, while simultaneously pointing at how certain practices undo this authority. This reinhabitance as a re-assemblage of memories and experiences is key to understanding a potential of the encounter with school and how this may activate alternate, minoritarian actualizations of teacher practice.  Conclusion   Understandings that emerged in conceptualizing time as montage pointed to the complexities of looking away through the embodiment of experience rather than reflecting on experience as past and desire for teaching as future. Learning through rather than from experience created the potential to disrupt memory and perception’s hold on and territorialization of thought. The destabilization of time offers the potential to develop the double effect of individuated understandings and political readability of experience, suggesting that intuition may offer insights into the specificity of constructs, including education and teacher practice. These insights suggest that minoritarian understandings within the majoritarian discourses of schooling, research and teacher practice are provoked in the mundane and repetitive qualities of schooling. Christen’s and Kelsie’s inscription of the aesthetic of becoming in filmmaking suggests that in the processes of affective inquiry, constant meaning making and the practices of territorialization, deterritorialization and reterritorialization form the pedagogical value of the encounter through intuition and the body’s capacity to act. In the performance of montage, both Christen and Kelsie destabilized the relegation of memory and recollection to the space of the past, and instead lived the virtual in the present moment. In the conditions for the creation of the 	   	   102	  new, memories and perceptions became amenable to change, and through intuition, this durational event emerged from a purely psychical dimension into the aesthetics of becoming.   In Chapter 4, I explore the concepts of space, place and experience to articulate the idea of anomalous space, as a play off Ellsworth’s (2005) anomalous places of learning. Chapter 4 extends understandings previously discussed, to examine how aporias of perception form as anomalous spaces of learning (Ellsworth, 2005); as Garoian (2010) argued, “slippages of perception in these spaces enable insightful and multivalent ways of seeing and understanding the complexities of alterity” (p. 179). The following deterritorialization will examine the formation of individuated productions of certain places, including schools, through discourse and experiences. These experiences are territorialized through and by the social and political discourse of schools, deterritorialized through individuated experience, and then further reterritorialized through certain practices within teacher education programs and subsequent early years of teaching. In particular, this next chapter will examine schools as a mundane, everyday territorialization of space, and the potential re-activation of this place, creating the conditions for new conceptualizations through experience.    	   	   103	  Chapter 4: Deterritorializing Experience: The Nomadic Inquiry of the Mundane, and the Present Absence   Introduction  In this chapter, I explore observations I made regarding the particular spaces that Christen and Kelsie returned to in their high schools, their filmed experiences of these spaces and the dialogue that these spaces provoked during our sessions. I examine Christen’s and Kelsie’s choices of places to shoot and consider how they performed their artistic practices as nomadic (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987) practices of inquiry in these spaces. Through these observations, I consider how particular types of experiences and spaces within the school activated memories and perceptions and how memories were subsequently taken up during the dialogue sessions. In particular, I am interested in examining the participants’ exploration of the school spaces as artists through filmmaking as a form of sensory/affective nomadic inquiry. Through this form of inquiry, Christen and Kelsie spent considerable time shooting school spaces that may be described as transitional, mundane and everyday, including the hallways and stairwells. These places activated dialogue in the group sessions that seemed to draw on personal rather than commonplace and perhaps generic understandings of school space. In these places, both Christen and Kelsie became attuned to forms of a present absence in their memory of schooling as they encountered the material erasure of their artwork and art practices; both Christen and Kelsie also explored their perceptions of practices associated with place. These places and practices offer a unique opportunity to explore the mundane and a present form of absence as rich sites for memory production and reinhabitance, as well as a form of artistic inquiry. This chapter draws on understandings about the deterritorialization of time, explored in Chapter 3, but it shifts the focus from time to space and place. This distinction enables the 	   	   104	  exploration of the connections between memory, place and experience and thereby consider (1) how perceptions of teacher practice form in school spaces and (2) how these sites may also be implicated in the destabilization of such perceptions, as a means of reinhabiting memory. Place and Pedagogy  Ellsworth (2005) argued that many educators and educational researchers examine practices in schools around particular goals and objectives to promote change in schools, and suggested instead that we look outside the places of schooling to reimagine education. She advocated a rethinking of education as an anomalous place and looked to the sensational experience in museums, symphony halls and other designed spaces to suggest an alternate perspective for learning and being. Unlike Ellsworth, I argue that we can return to places of schooling to re-think habitual and tacit perceptions, but the return to the school must engage in practices and experiences that destabilize these perceptions and recollections rather than affirm them.   To explore this idea, I draw on the works of O’Donoghue (2010), Springgay (2011) and Garoian (2013) to examine Christen’s and Kelsie’s films and the places within the films that activated particular experiences and memories. I discuss Deleuze’s (1991) work on the composites of experience, and I further develop my earlier critique of the methods and processes of narrative inquiry (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990; Dewey, 1934) and narrative identity (Ricoeur, 1992) as affirming rather than differentiating the composite of experience. I argue that the use of reflexivity in narrative inquiry draws on recognition and recollection. I argue that instead, the art encounter (O’Sullivan, 2006), informed by Deleuze’s (1994) notion of Deleuze (cendental empiricism positions experience as a process and product of differentiation rather than an object of reflection. I draw on these understandings of experience to consider how Christen’s and 	   	   105	  Kelsie’s investigations of the school space offer insights into opportunities for new understandings to emerge in research and pedagogy.  The Experience of Space and Place in Christen’s and Kelsie’s Films   Figure 15: Stills from Christen’s and Kelsie’s schools, displayed in iMovie   In the Prelude and Chapter 1, I considered the concept and practices of the return to explore how both research and pedagogy have designed and understood experience as related to and informing teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice. In this chapter, I draw on Deleuze’s (1994) work with Nietzsche’s concept of the Eternal Return. Deleuze explored the eternal return to consider the idea that history repeats itself to similar ends, but suggested that rather than similarity and sameness, the eternal return is difference produced through thought. In doing so, Deleuze (1994) suggested that particular types of experience activate highly individuated affective intensities that articulate the concept of difference integral to becoming. The affective intensity that provokes difference dissolves the binary distinctions, such as happy and sad, 	   	   106	  signified through language. Happiness and sadness, rather than being opposites, are resonating levels of affective intensity (Massumi, 2002), suggesting that “[i]ntensity and experience accompany one another like two mutually presupposing dimensions or like two sides of a coin” (p. 33). Affective intensities produce the ontological event of becoming through a disruption to perceptions, provoking difference and individuation rather than repetition. This difference inheres in a body’s capacity to act and, in doing so, participates in a perpetual form of differentiation. I argue that by engaging in certain experiences, this difference is activated, and that instead of establishing or finding a teaching identity, teacher candidates might engage in practices that destabilize their understandings and produce alternate perceptions. These understandings of the experience of place—including nomadic inquiry, the mundane and the present absence—are considered in the following sections, offering insight into how teacher candidates respond to, make sense of and narrate their return to their former K-12 educational spaces. Nomadic Inquiry of Place through Film 	   One of the interesting qualities of the school spaces shot by Christen and Kelsie is the apparent sameness and lack of distinguishing features of their school spaces, which were built in different cities and at different times. Yet, while the school spaces indicated similar aesthetics and styles, the participants’ individuated experiences of these similar spaces offer insight how the materiality of place in pedagogy tends to be implicated in difference rather than sameness in understandings. Prior to their first return to their schools, both Christen and Kelsie formulated a plan to return to particular sites, which they perceived as corresponding to the prompts and to my needs as a researcher. During the first return, both participants pursued a form of inquiry that seemed less about responding to the prompts or to their perceptions of what I needed and instead 	   	   107	  seemed to respond to their affective responses provoking an individual inquiry of place. I have come to identify this form of inquiry as affective inquiry of difference, or what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) described as nomadic wanderings. This form of wandering produced what I earlier called an aesthetic of becoming, an aesthetic of difference rather than sameness. This aesthetic of becoming, as an aesthetic of difference, is activated in particular experiences that disrupt the composites of experience through a sensorial, affective jolt to thought. This aesthetic is not contained within the film as such but is activated through more or less individuated intensity in and through the making and viewing of the work.   While the participants’ films appeared to be visually similar because of both technique and content, the experiences and understandings provoked in these places were distinct and individuated. For Christen in particular, the return disengaged her inquiry from her perceived expectations and instead allowed her to embody her memories and recollections of schooling; this suggests that the return and filmmaking allowed for a form of exploration of space and memory, distinct from recollection. Adrienne: [pause 9 seconds] So what was it like using the video camera? Like did you find that it created a… Oh yeah, I won’t offer any suggestions. What was it like using it to kind of document going back to school? Kelsie: I thought it was fine, but I’m comfortable with that medium, so… Adrienne: You didn’t feel like it was something that inhibited it? Like if you were walking through the school without and trying to recall a memory, can you think about any differences between the two, I guess imagined? Kelsie: I think using a video camera forces you to think about what you’re going to be doing or the spaces that you’re going to enter, what you want to say or not say. But if you’re just freely walking, then that thought wouldn’t occur to you in the first place. 	   	   108	  Christen: Yeah. I liked using it though because it helped me—I don’t know how—at the current time, but it seemed to help me remember. Yeah, and I was looking for a purpose instead of just wandering, so it helps the memories or what I was going to say, it helped it stay in my mind.  Springgay (2011) explored the concept of sensational pedagogy and examined “the use of walking as a form of research-creation” (p. 636). She examined the affective responses provoked through participation in a relational art practice and considered the sense of smell in the construction of alterity. Like Ellsworth (2005), Springgay was interested in the relationship between affect, sensation and pedagogy, and similar to Semetsky (2009), Springgay suggested that affective responses disrupt perception and create the possibility for new thought. For Christen and Kelsie, the sensory engagement with the school space triggered memories through the embodied affective response to place that resisted mediation through language and suspended processes of interpretation, alluded to by Garoian (2010, 2013). Similar to Irwin (2006), Springgay has suggested walking as a research methodology, exploring the flâneur of the Dadaist movement , the Lettrists and the Situationists and subsequent revision of this disinterested walker from a “passive spectator into an active participant” (p. 644) who is exploring the aesthetic and critical impulses of walking. This shift from passive to active suggests that the affective responses triggered through walking from place to place disrupt tacit perceptions and the knowledge produced in passive engagement.   For Christen and Kelsie, the embodiment of inquiry engaged in during the return suggests that intuition is continually under revision. This revision or difference is triggered by sensory and affective responses produced in and by place. These responses and this form of knowing guided their movement and functioned as what Garoian (2013) refers to as a prosthetic to visuality, informed by affective responses.  	   	   109	   Following the return, both participants sat with their films in order to process meaning. For Christen, this time was spent journaling so that she could explore the meanings in relation to the prompts and to what she felt my expectations were. She voluntarily sent her journal notes to me with the following note: Hi Adrienne!  I’m sorry these notes are just coming to you today, I had hoped to have them to you sooner. I have been reviewing the videos and I am hoping this is helpful for your research. I had a hard time connecting the prompt to all of the memories that flooded my mind while I was doing this so I am hoping this is useful! (Personal communication, November 12, 2012) Both prior to and following the return, Christen aimed to help my research by producing work that would support what she anticipated or perceived my needs to be. This is distinctly different from the form of inquiry that she engaged in during the return as her embodied memories guided her exploration of place. As Kelsie and (particularly) Christen described their return to the school, I wanted to know how they felt about their first experience in their practicum school, as a way of contextualizing their return to their own high school. Christen: Yeah. So the kids were like… I don’t know. It was very strange. You could tell they were like… they had eyes on me. Because I went there too early, so half of them weren’t finished yet, so I kind of sat around in the cafeteria. And they could tell that I was a foreigner, I wasn’t from there. Kelsie: [laughs] Adrienne: How do you think they can tell? Because you get that sense from… Like how do you think they can tell? Christen: I don’t know. I felt like… I was like, “Oh, I’m back in my school.” I felt like I belonged, and then I could tell, it was like, “I don’t belong here anymore.” I don’t know. Kelsie: I think its body language. 	   	   110	  Christen: Yeah. That could be what it is. Kelsie: Or eye movement. Christen: Yeah. But you could tell, they were like doing that, and then they were like, you know, whispering and stuff, and I was like, “I should probably wait a little longer.” [laughs] Adrienne: Did you feel that way when you went into practicum? Christen: No, not really. But I mean that was different I guess, because then they kind of… they were a little more accepting because they knew I was there and I was the teacher, or student teacher, so they weren’t so, I don’t know, nervous I guess or unsure of what my reasoning for being there was. And I guess too because I showed up and I had like a camera bag and put it in a bag and stuff, and so I wasn’t a student and I wasn’t a teacher, so it was clear that I was there for some other reason. Through a description of her experience of the school space and her perceptions of students’ response to her presence in the school, Christen distinguished between her experience within her practicum school and the researched school as one with and without a purpose. The purpose of being and sense of belonging in a school for practicum gave Christen a degree of comfort, particularly as she perceived the students to be more accepting of her presence. She felt that the students understood why she was at that school, and with these understandings, a system of relationships and behaviours was instilled that sustained a rationality embedded in the larger discourses of the purposes of schools and, subsequently, teachers. During her practicum, she experienced her movements around the school as rational in the scope of schooling and felt that students also perceived her presence as rational. While this provided a sense of purpose and comfort, it potentially framed what was possible in terms of the normativity of the teaching or student teaching identity. 	   	   111	   These normative perceptions of teacher education programs as training teachers potentially conform teacher candidates’ experiences and understandings formed in the return to schools within known capacities to act. The return, prompts and filming offered alternate parameters of movement and purpose to those outlined by normative student and teacher performances. Christen’s and Kelsie’s movement within the practicum school was shaped by their bodies’ known capacity to act in that space, while in their high school, the lack of purpose or of problems to be solved created the conditions for nomadic inquiry to destabilize rather than reify particular performances and perceptions. The participants’ return and the encounter point to a form of bodily engagement similar to Massumi’s (2002) play. In this sense, the return acknowledges the discourse and perceptions of how one should perform in a particular place, but Christen and Kelsie, as minoritarians or nomadic inquirers, provoked the creation of a new set of rules and with them a new performance of place. This performance destabilized the normative memories and perceptions of school, through the emergence of alternate memories of spaces that had not previously been recollected.  Christen’s and Kelsie’s embodied exploration of the school space created the conditions for new and alternate understandings, particularly those found in the mundane spaces. This form of experience does not erase the contextual and discursive elements of schooling, yet it does allow for opportunities to develop alternate or minoritarian understandings within the majoritarian perspective. In the following section, I explore these understandings and Deleuze’s concept of transcendental empiricism to consider this minoritarian experience for its potential to create conditions for new thought. Transcendental Empiricism, Aesthetics and the Everyday of Schooling 	  	   	   112	   For Deleuze (2001), transcendental empiricism is located in the triadic relationship of percept, affect and concept. Stagoll (2005) argues that for Deleuze that Kantian notion of transcendental “reproduces the empirical in transcendental form and then shields it from further critique” (p. 283). The triadic relation of percept, affect and concept resist this notion of empiricism and transcendence and instead position transcendental empiricism as a way to understand experience and difference. Semetsky (2010) suggested that the activation of the potential of affective responses, in particular sense events that alter tacit perceptions, creates the conditions for the generation of new concepts. According to Semetsky (2004), “This is an intuition, a necessary condition for the practical production of meaning. . . . In this respect transcendental empiricism purports to discover conditions that exist beyond the actual commonsensical experience” (p. 439). Masny (2013) argued that transcendental empiricism conceptualizes the subject as decentered and as part of an assemblage with material and expressive qualities that, to a certain extent, express a temporal relationality rather than an “autonomous thinking subject” (p. 342).  I argue that Christen’s and Kelsie’s activation of particular memories and experiences occurred not in regimented and careful practices of recollection but when cognition was at rest or disengaged as looking away, triggering affective responses to disrupt particular significations. While both Christen and Kelsie explored their school spaces through their encounters with space and memory, they did so through their artistic practice. Both participants moved through their schools based on varying levels of affective intensity that activated and were activated by particular memories and sensory experiences. In these moments, their inquiry became highly individuated, as affect offered a unique experience based on the individual. Similar to Garoian (2010) with his notion of prosthetic visuality, Bennett (2012) argued that “art ‘abstracts’ from the 	   	   113	  actualized events” (p.43), creating the potential for a form of abstraction of perception. This abstraction suggests that the individuated affective intensity of an experience offers alternate encounters (O’Sullivan, 2006) as an abstraction from tacit perceptions. I suggest that Christen’s and Kelsie’s return to schools distinguishes the embodied experience of the return from the recollected return. Their nomadic inquiry provoked a differentiating process instead of one that served to confirm through recognition and cohesion.   As discussed in Chapter 1, the original intent of the prompts—to provoke an alternate process of meaning making and a disruption to the cohesive processes of narration (Ricoeur, 1992)—was delayed, as prior to the return, Christen and Kelsie drew on the recollection of memories as a way of responding to the prompts. During the return, the school was repurposed as less an object and more a material participant in the assemblage of the event of the return (Masny, 2013). Kelsie and Christen embodied and enacted an affective form of inquiry or pedagogy, described by Hickey-Moody (2013) as a visceral prompt, which shifted their response to the prompts as participants in their process of abstracting the actualized event while simultaneously pointing to the political signification of schooling. Their return thereby pointed to the sites of affective intensity, which in turn pointed to the mundane rather than the narrative event as the site of interest. The following section explores the mundane and its potential as a site for the participants’ filmmaking and consideration of perceptions of practice. The Mundane and the Everyday   For Dewey (1934): An experience has a unity that gives it its name, that meal, that storm, that rupture of friendship. The existence of this unity is constituted by a single quality that pervades the entire experience in spite of the variation of its constituent parts. 	   	   114	  . . . In going over an experience in mind after its occurrence, we may find that one property rather than another was sufficiently dominant so that it characterizes the experience as a whole. (p. 38)  Dewey’s identification and categorization of experience involves the process of learning from experience as an object of reflection. In this process of learning from particular experiences, Dewey makes a distinction between aesthetic experiences and anesthetic experiences as those that do and do not register in our ways of making sense of experience. He distinguishes mundane experiences as incomplete and insufficient to form an experience. For Dewey, “There is experience, but so slack and discursive that it is not an experience. Needless to say, such experiences are anesthetic” (p. 41). As discussed in Chapter 1, traditional narrative inquiry (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990) and narrative identity (Ricoeur, 1992) have drawn on Dewey’s (1934) an experience to understand the relationship between education, experience and meaning making. Christen’s and Kelsie’s return and the activation of memories in the mundane and repetitive, suggest that researchers and teachers should consider how the anesthetic repetitive and mundane habit, shape perceptions and memories of practice. These mundane experiences and mundane places do not constitute an experience in the Deweyian sense, yet through repetition, habit and ritual shape how we create, understand and thus perform a particular place. As such, these experiences offer a rich opportunity to problematize normativity through a reinhabitance of these mundane aspects of the everyday of schooling.   McLaren (1988) argued that “affective or visceral investments in the world provide a sense of unity and totality to our multiple subject positioning within discursive formations” (p. 168). Rather than reproducing the ritualized investments of the discursive formations of schooling, drawn on in recollection through an adherence to the moral discourse of teaching, 	   	   115	  Christen and Kelsie instead performed a nomadic inquiry of difference—not as a critique of dominant models but as an exploration, which cut through the majoritarian model. Instead of reifying the structures and discursive formations through a purposeful response to the prompts, as they did in the second return to the schools, Christen and Kelsie became attuned to an individuated inquiry of place. Their first return suggested that the transitional and mundane spaces were important places where particular forms of learning and socialization took place, and that these places helped shape both participants’ desire for teaching practices.  The footage shot by both Christen and Kelsie at the beginning of their first return highlighted similar images of locker-lined hallways, painted cinder-block construction, bulletin boards with notices, rubber baseboard covers and linoleum floors. Figures 3–5, 10 and 11 in Chapter 2 offer a study of repetition, and the rhythm of stairways and ramps that constitute student pathways from one classroom to another, to lockers, offices, and exits, with few options—such as chairs or benches—on which to linger. Their films produced uniformity of both sound and sight, as the participants shot their footage while moving down the center of the hallway, panning left to right, documenting the school space. Recessed doorways to classrooms, and rows of lockers, delineated orderly pathways, and in both participants’ films, buzzing fluorescent lights and the echo of students’ voices and footsteps created the same volume register on the film footage.   While the footage was all strikingly similar, how the filming process unfolded and the individual responses to the films were different from what I had anticipated. As I mentioned in Chapter 2, when I received Christen’s and Kelsie’s films of the school space, I was surprised to find that most had been shot in silence. I had anticipated that both participants would narrate as they entered the school. I had thought that they might use the camera as a means of visual 	   	   116	  documentation of the school space while speaking their responses to the prompts, but instead, most of each film was silent, with the exception of the noises and sounds of the spaces. Kelsie, more than Christen, narrated her return, but even at that, the narration was surprisingly limited. While these portions of the dialogue were discussed in Chapter 3, I have included them again to examine (in particular) Kelsie’s consideration of her silence in a place that she viewed as social. Adrienne: So one question that I had—and it was for both—I’m wondering why you chose not to narrate as you were going through? Christen: Do you want to go first, or…? Kelsie: Well, I found it difficult, to be honest. It was difficult to know what to talk about and when, because sometimes there were people around and it was a little bit awkward, because you’re talking to yourself, to a camera. [laughs] But I didn’t feel I had much to say in the hallways, but that’s funny because that’s where the majority of socialization takes place. So I guess I was thinking about it later and thinking about where my memories take place, and sometimes they’re in the classroom but a lot of the times it’s in the hallways, but it’s not ever… it’s not in a specific area, it’s just a general thought, if that makes sense. Christen: I think the same thing. There were a lot of kids still running around when I    was there, and I was just thinking, “Oh, this is too uncomfortable to be     walking around talking.” And then same thing, a lot of times walking, I didn’t    know what to say, but then looking back on it, I have more thoughts that     come up. And I… Ah, I mean I think that’s kind of also a way that I work too, is    that like I reflect a lot, so it’s hard for me to think of things to say like [snaps    fingers].  For Christen, the return activated memories that caused her to go to unexpected places in the school. She had planned where she wanted to go and had written down things that she might point to and describe, but once she entered the school, she found that her plan changed and that she was not able to process the meaning of the return into language in order to narrate. While she returned to various places because of the memories that were activated, she was unable to 	   	   117	  consider or construct the meaning of those particular places until she went home and viewed the film, and then again when she viewed the films in our dialogue session. Adrienne: And how about for you? What do you feel… when you went into these spaces, did you find that there was places that, yeah, like had more of an impact or an intensity? Like being in a particular room was more intense than say walking through a hallway? Like what spaces were more intense? Or was it pretty consistent as you were going through? Christen: For me, it was also the hallway, but yeah, there were certain areas of the hallway that were more intense in feelings and stuff like that. And yeah, I guess kind of from before, it was always kind of the relationship… whatever happened there, like a relationship or an event or something that would trigger… Adrienne: Were there any memories that popped up to you, for you that were unexpected? Christen: Yeah. Well, this one especially was really unexpected. Thankfully it was a good memory. [laughs] Yeah, this one was really unexpected. I just had no idea going in that I would remember all these things. And then on the second floor, there was another one that popped up that I just hadn’t even thought about, and then there’s a mural and I was like, “Oh yeah,” and so that triggered the [memories and stuff too]. Adrienne: How about you [Kelsie]? Did you find that there was anything unexpected going back, particularly because you had been in there not too long ago? Kelsie: Umm, well, I found it… I guess mainly the photo room and the yearbook room, that was unexpected, and the feeling that I had towards it was unexpected, because I mean I spent a lot of time in that space, so I guess that association. And I didn’t think I would have a reaction to certain hallways, but I did, and I guess that’s the connotation with whatever subject it was. If I didn’t like that subject, then I kind of went… While the majoritarian event of schooling may be consistent with that of repetition described by McLaren (1988), Christen’s and Kelsie’s nomadic, minoritarian exploration of school space suggests that individuated experiences offer alternate understandings from those that produce and are produced by discourses surrounding teacher practice and schooling, and those that form 	   	   118	  the traditional narrative. The iconography of the hallways and lockers was disrupted as Christen and Kelsie explored the space, transforming memories by reinhabiting them in the present, creating potential for different actualizations of perceptions and practices. Within an inquiry of difference, Christen and Kelsie explored the spaces as active participants rather than passive spectators. This form of engagement disrupts the hallways and stairways as mundane and transitional, yet the space is not heightened to an experience. Rather, Christen and Kelsie returned to these spaces where their present engagement allowed alternate understandings and questions about their experiences and memories to form. In doing so, the participants’ embodied, affective inquiry produced the school space as other, and in the return provoked difference rather than sameness, in a suspension of interpretation that draws solely on memory and recollection.   In the following section, I explore a paradoxical emergence in Christen’s and Kelsie’s exploration of the mundane aspects of school as what I have called a present absence. Described earlier in Chapter One through Rancière’s (2013) notion of double effect, the paradox of the present absence suggests the untimely nature of the virtual as never fully present yet present sufficiently in the actualization or the real. This double effect still resists the didactic and deterministic need to suggest that an encounter with thought may be pre-planned, yet speaks to the relationship of the virtual and the real. Throughout the nomadic inquiry process of mundane aspects of schooling, both participants’ became attuned to searching for aspects of their memories that were absent in a material form. This absence spurred on their inquiry of place and became significant in our conversations about their memories of schooling and their perceptions of teacher practice. While I have conceptualized this inquiry into a present absence, both Christen and Kelsie responded uniquely to the absences they perceived. The Present Absence 	  	   	   119	   In both participants’ work, the paradox of a present absence emerged as they explored the school space, although each developed a different understanding and experience of this absence.  Adrienne: So did you start off wanting to go to places that had sort of a positive memory? Christen: Yeah, yeah. Adrienne: And then…? Christen: And then I was like, “Oh, this is interesting,” and I was like, “Oh, I remember here,” and I figured that would be a good thing to recall. [laughs] Kelsie: Yeah, I feel the same way. I mean when I walked into the cafeteria—I think I talked about that in this—I had a memory of a painting that I was supposed to do, but it got rejected because of… Christen: Oh! Kelsie: …the nature of the painting. It was a big hamburger for the cafeteria and they didn’t want to associate fast food with… But the hamburger was this big. It didn’t look like one. And I just remember, I had a flashback of seeing everyone else’s paintings and going, “Oh, I totally forgot about that.” And I didn’t expect to go into the cafeteria and have a memory, just because I was thinking, “Oh, it’s full of kids, and that’s what I remember,” but… For Kelsie, the school cafeteria was a place where the rejection of her artwork taught her about the power structures of schooling and where she described her future desires for a community-oriented and democratic model of education.  Kelsie: For me, it was mostly the sight of different things or areas, because everything is designated to an area—there’s a math area, a socials, a science and then the art. But it was also memories of what wasn’t there, or what wasn’t there now, and then your memories replacing it with what it used to be for you. And for me, that was especially in the photography room because it’s changed so much, and it was really saddening to see. Adrienne: So what was sad about it? Because I remember that on your video. 	   	   120	  Kelsie: I don’t know if I… I don’t think I recorded the conversation I had with the principal, but he led me into the room, and there’s two parts. The first part was just bare—there’s nothing on the walls, when it used to be covered in photos students had done and it was just very homey and just good memories from yearbook and photography, digital media. And then you go into the next room, where it used to be full of computers, Mac computers, and all those computers are gone and now it’s a light studio for photography. So that was a shock, that the computers were gone. And then the principal said, “Yeah, I don’t know what I’m going to do about this area over here,” and he was talking about the darkroom with the revolving door.    Figure 16: Encroaching on Kelsie   As Kelsie moved throughout the school, she consistently identified areas and places that represented loss or impending loss. She filmed the area of the school where her wall mural (see Figure 18) remained as one of the few from her grade, as other murals from later years covered over the earlier ones. She described the loss of the history of the place and what this meant for the community in the school. As she filmed the mural, she described the friendships that she had formed and the friends that had painted murals near hers. As she continued filming the school, she began to identify non-material, sensorial aspects of schooling that had once triggered positive memories of school and her classrooms, particularly the art room. 	   	   121	  Kelsie: I noticed smells that were absent. So like for example going into the drawing and painting room, there’s no oils being used in that classroom anymore, and that’s what we used, was oil paints, but this teacher uses acrylic. So that absence of linseed oil, which kind of makes it feel more… I don’t know. I guess for me it makes it feel more artsy. Adrienne: The linseed oil? Kelsie: The linseed oil makes it feel more like an art classroom, whereas the absence of it is… I don’t know. It was interesting. I noticed that it wasn’t there, and I was looking for it. Through Kelsie’s lived memory and affective response to the return to her high school, she described her future teaching practice by pointing to the importance of community and family as a model of teaching. Throughout her film, she looked for and could not find: smells of linseed oil; materials and machines for the darkroom in which she had spent so much of her time; space for her painting that was never hung; and the impending erasure of her mural. Her film and dialogue explored these present and impending absences as she spoke about the material erasure of her presence in the school. Adrienne: So what made you come back to this space? Kelsie: I feel like it has a lot of importance in my mind. It takes… When I think of the school, that’s the room I think of, because I spent so much time there. I was there in class during school, probably for two… at least two blocks a day. It was a six-block system, and then also after school Tuesdays and Thursdays to work on the yearbook, for quite a long time. So I would say that room is where I spent the most of my time. And there used to be computers in there, and so that’s… we were there working on the yearbook and different digital projects. And so I guess maybe the friendships I had in there, the memories associate that with a good feeling. So it’s kind of common to go in there, but then at the same time, it’s changed so much, and that’s disruptive to those memories. Adrienne: Oh, interesting. So when you went back, could you remember, or did it have any of the same feel as it did before? 	   	   122	  Kelsie: Before when I worked in there? Adrienne: When you went to high school. Kelsie: No. It… I mean, it was just the memories that had the feeling. When I was in that space, it feels so cold and so disconnected from the rest of the school feeling, and from… because there’s nothing in there. It’s quite grey and there’s no pictures. There’s no student artwork. There’s nothing. It doesn’t feel like a happy positive energy. So I’m wondering if that’s… the teacher who’s in there now is the teacher who’s taken on a lot, and is in the other painting room, or if it’s the type of work they’re doing in there, maybe it doesn’t involve that. Or maybe that’s just my connection and disappointment to that, because they’re not using that space to its fullest capacity to make those memories for the other students. Adrienne: So what memories do you think they would pull out of this space? What would the students be doing in this room? Kelsie: Well, ideally they’d be using the darkroom, and they’d be going in and out of that little spinning door and they would be… In the other room they would be using the desk spaces. They would be… Ideally they’d be able to look at past work and reference their work to that. Like with the yearbook, there was always layout pages around. But then again, with this light studio, that’s new, and that could be a lot of fun. There were… I don’t know if it went over there, but I thought I had found some costumes at the end. Maybe it didn’t work. But I mean, that could be a lot of fun as well. I was also relating it to my practicum because I’ll be doing photography, and I could potentially do lights, and I am doing the darkroom. So maybe I’m thinking and relating it to how I would like a classroom to be set up. In this moment, Kelsie considered her response to the place and drew her future desires for teaching into the present moment for consideration. Christen discussed the return through her recounting of the production of affective, somatic memories. She did not recall the experiences of schooling as much as she felt schooling, including the weight of her backpack, the anxiety produced in certain spaces, and the feelings of discomfort in the presence of the classroom of a teacher she perceived as disliking her.  	   	   123	   Figure 17: Still from Christen looking for the edges of her painting  Rather than absence, Christen’s presence of memory was felt, and this affective engagement produced new memories that had remained outside of Christen’s initial memory recall in preparing for the return. The film documented her visual search to locate the edges and textures of her painting, which had been covered over after years of paintings by other students, to locate her seat in class, her locker, her view in the classroom and her perspective on the teachers. Each of these returns within the return, provoked by an earlier memory, stemmed from an affective engagement with place. She did not simply remember the way she felt; the feeling was produced in the moment, or as described in Chapter 1, the untimely emergence of the virtual in becoming.   	   	   124	   Figure 18: Still from when Christen found her painting   Rather than imagining the space as a work of art, Christen and Kelsie engaged in movement throughout their spaces, as artists creating the school as other through embodiment. This offered an alternate experience of place, performing the work of an art installation and inscribing an aesthetic of becoming. Similar to Bennett’s (2012) practical aesthetic, the school and the inquiry created the material conditions for the inhabitance of memory through sensory engagement.  Deleuze’s (1991) thesis on difference and repetition looked to understand immanence as ontological difference, and my research has explored this concept and its inherence in the capacity to disrupt the perception, and perhaps the performance, of teacher practice. Kelsie’s and Christen’s return to school, though, suggests that difference rather than sameness is produced in and through the embodiment of experience. The representational qualities of schools that form 	   	   125	  the iconography of education are amenable to individuation, suggesting that while the sameness of schools points to the repetitive nature of societal hierarchies and structures, they are also capable of creating points of rupture that offer the potential to reimagine schooling and teacher practice. Nomadic inquiry is produced by, as it produces the opportunities for, confronting perception and recollection, allowing for an alternate conceptualization of places and practices. Conclusion   The deterritorialization of experience in this research extended from Christen’s and Kelsie’s return and their embodied experiences. These experiences provoked alternate forms of knowledge and knowing, which disrupted normative perceptions of practice. Their nomadic inquiry shifted understandings of experience as transcendental, as it expressed a not-yet-knowable person and potential. The participants’ return informs the potential of art practices to provoke alternate ways of knowing and being—a becoming through the ontology of difference. Their transcendental experience of place disrupted the rationalized performance in place, which created the opportunities for alternate forms of embodied, affective nomadic inquiry and the chance to reinhabit memories and future desires of schooling in the moment of the return. The repetitive nature and the eternal return of sameness produced in and through schooling were disrupted through affective and aesthetic becomings. The present absence of the mundane was reinhabited through the embodiment of the return, creating opportunities for alternate perceptions and recollections.   In the following chapter, I explore the understandings generated through the deterritorialization of time and experience, to articulate both a methodological and a pedagogical mapping. In what I now describe as a methodology of intuition, I look to the findings of this 	   	   126	  research and Deleuze’s (1991) work with Henri Bergson to explore the conditions for the provocation of new and creative thought in research and pedagogy.     	   	   127	  Chapter 5: The Deterritorialization of Qualitative Methodology and the Reterritorialization of an Arts-Based Methodology of Intuition Introduction   In this chapter, I draw on Deleuze’s (1991) work with Henri Bergson’s (1988) concept of intuition,20 scholarship on contemporary art discussed in Chapter 1 and the deterritorializations of time and experience, to propose an arts-based methodology of intuition. This methodology functions as a reterritorialization of existing qualitative and arts-based research methodologies through the findings discussed throughout this dissertation. The methodology of intuition proposed by Bergson and Deleuze produces a way to conduct research as a process of provocation to new and creative thought and as a shift from epistemology and identity to ontology and Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987) concept of becoming. The arts-based methodology of intuition draws on these understandings and those produced through this research to explore how art practice also creates these opportunities, but in ways that are unique to artistic practice in educational research. In doing so, this methodology produces a minoritarian fissure within the majoritarian discourses of many existing forms of arts-based research. It departs from particular processes and concepts, including the structuring and framing of questions and notions of time and experience. The arts-based methodology of intuition that I propose potentially expands the 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  20 Described and elaborated on throughout this chapter, intuition is both a methodology and a method that problematizes, differentiates and temporalizes experience rather than drawing on experience to affirm recognition. The concept of intuition and its importance to education has a significant history (Noddings & Shore, 1984). Semetsky (2004) argued that four main aspects of intuitive modes have been consistent in the exploration of intuition, including the involvement of the senses, the ability of the subject to be affected by an object, a desire for understanding, and a tension in certainty. Deleuze’s (1991) work with Bergson contributes to the trajectory of intuition by offering precise rules as an ontological methodology and  “the presentation of unconscious, not the representation of consciousness” (p. 192). 	   	   128	  rhizomatic field of research to explore how a focus on ontology rather than epistemology can provoke conditions for alterity in thinking and creating through research and pedagogy.  As discussed in Chapter 1, the need for the deterritorialization of qualitative research methodologies has been proposed by post-qualitative research and scholarship (Braidotti, 2013; Jackson, 2013; Jackson & Mazzei, 2012; Lenz Taguchi, 2012, 2013; MacLure, 2013; Mazzei, 2013; St. Pierre, 2013). These works suggest that a shift in both the theoretical underpinning of and the methods used in research destabilizes humanist aspects that remain in current forms of qualitative and arts-based research (jagodzinski & Wallin, 2013). Specifically, the authoritative “I” of narrative, which is central to identity and epistemology, is displaced through what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) referred to as an assemblage.  The concept of an assemblage initially points to Deleuze’s exterior relationality, which suggests that groupings or territories, including “men” and “women”, have an internal consistency, sustaining arbitrary and normalized boundaries between groups. In an assemblage, Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987) concept of the event of immanent difference or becoming is favoured instead as a temporal, perpetual and non-repetitive process. This process resists establishing the ideas of sameness and consistency. DeLanda (2006) argued that rather than being consistent, assemblages change as the components of the assemblage change. No single component sustains authority over the make-up and performance of the assemblage, and so it remains in a perpetual state of becoming. These temporal and relational qualities resist reductionist strategies, including the concept of identity. This shift away from epistemology and identity politics, described in Chapter 1, requires that the individual exist only as part of a complex assemblages that, in its dynamism, produces and is produced by experiences, some of which may sustain or destabilize tacit and habitual forms of knowing.  	   	   129	  The ontology of difference indicates that through this complex and shifting relationship, connections made through material and expressive components produce the individual as difference. This difference is not different from an original but expresses a process whereby, through the emergence of the virtual in the real, a person’s memories and perceptions become amenable to change, and the person’s capacities to act therefore also differentiate.  To pursue research as ontology of becoming, intuition forms the method of inquiry, as a disposition of seeking to destabilize fixed perceptions through the activation of sensory and affective forms of experience. Intuition resists the immediate interpretation of these forms of experience and instead produces a disposition that remains open to alternate forms of understandings that simultaneously shape and emerge from individuated and intensive forms of experience. Drawing on Bergson (1988), Grosz (2004) examined the forms of knowledge and knowing that underpin the concept of becoming. She argued that the knowledge expressed as intelligence and instinct draws on and sustains representational and normalized understandings. Like Deleuze (1991), she suggested that intuition expresses difference in kind and immanent difference, in that intuition as an ontological method problematizes, differentiates and temporalizes experience rather than drawing on experience to affirm recognition.  Ontological research, then, does not proceed to test assumptions or a hypothesis, and is not designed to produce replicable findings. It pursues inquiry for the as yet unknowable and in doing so produces a stance or disposition instead of an object of knowledge. This does not suggest that knowledge is not formed in the process of inquiry, but that through various processes, our capacities to act are shaped by intuition, which resists the fixity of interpretation and representation and instead creates the potential to hold multiple and potentially conflicting understandings of complex issues.  	   	   130	   As I will describe later in this chapter, Bennett’s (2005) work explored how art practice may provoke more complex ways of understanding highly charged and moralized events, outside of the binaries of good and bad, victim and perpetrator that often frame the potential to understand and position oneself in terms of an event or issue. In the arts-based methodology of intuition, intuition and art practice are in a contiguous relationship, which potentially forms both a method and a methodology for new and creative thought in research and pedagogy. Through intuition and art practice, alternate understandings emerge in unpredictable and unknowable ways. During Christen’s and Kelsie’s return to school and their filmmaking of those experiences, their pre-planned return to events of significance shifted to sites of the mundane and of present absence. Exploring these films created insights into the aesthetic choices that each had made during times of highly individuated experiences, and other aesthetic choices that I suggest were representations of more generalized and normative understandings of schooling. Their affective, sensorial and artistic exploration of the school potentially occurred outside of the discourse of good and bad teacher practices, as they resisted the immediacy of interpretation while exploring the school space. This form of experience and art practice offers the possibility of alternate understandings outside of standardized discourse, creating the potential for the as yet unknowable.  The emergence of the arts-based methodology of intuition began when I encountered Lau’s Room (1994) and continued as I sought to develop a deeper understanding of Christen’s and Kelsie’s return. Lather and St. Pierre (2013) argued that “[t]he ethical charge of our work as inquirers is surely to question our attachments that keep us from thinking and living differently” (p. 631). Both my experience with Room and the understandings gained from my work with Christen and Kelsie led me to question my attachments to the operations of time and experience 	   	   131	  in research. As a future direction and conclusion to this dissertation, I propose an arts-based methodology of intuition as an expression of the insight I have gained via this research. In what follows, I place the rules of the Deleuzian/Bergsonian methodology of intuition in conversation with Christen’s and Kelsie’s return and filmmaking, in an effort to further understand and articulate the potential of an arts-based methodology of intuition in teacher education research and pedagogy. The Methodology of Intuition and the Potential of Encountering through Art   According to Deleuze (1991), the rules designed by Bergson—including the creating and stating of problems, the exploration of immanent difference rather than sameness, and thinking time as a non-linear confluence of past, present and future—suggest a precise philosophical methodology, which I argue provides a potential framework for both research and pedagogy as a generative and creative undertaking. While the notion of rules being applied to the concepts of intuition, creative thinking and research denotes a peculiar tension within processes that are highly individuated and unique, Bergson’s specificity, according to Grosz (2004), resists the concrete specificity of science and instead looks to the specificity of life. Grosz described Bergson’s intuition as “the close, intimate, internal comprehension of an immersion in the durational qualities of life. Intuition is not an alternate to instinct and intelligence, but their orientation in different directions” (p. 234). This orientation suggests forms of artistic practice and experience that may create the conditions to encounter (O’Sullivan, 2006) thought and to use new and creative ways to engage in research and pedagogical practices.   The premise of the methodology of intuition rules posits that we cannot learn from either pure experience or pure recollection, as both are entangled in sustaining and affirming natural perception. This premise is consistent with Christen’s and Kelsie’s return to their schools. 	   	   132	  Further, the rules of the methodology of intuition suggest that processes of coming to know that are inherent in qualitative research, including reflection, tend to confirm that which is already known instead of creating the conditions for new and creative knowledge. Additionally, the concept of duration, so important to intuition, suggests that the event or becoming produces a unique and novel ontology as we draw on the virtual of memories and perceptions, which activates an ontology of difference or becoming rather than of linear identity. These rules, rather than being restricting or conforming, perpetuate a philosophical and methodological mapping for creative thought.   For Deleuze (1994): Thought is primarily trespass and violence, the enemy, and nothing presupposes philosophy: Everything begins with misosophy. Do not count upon thought to ensure the relative necessity of what it thinks. Rather count upon the contingency of an encounter with that which forces thought to raise up and educate the absolute necessity of an act of thought or a passion to think. The conditions of a true critique and a true creation are the same: the destruction of an image of thought which presupposes itself and the genesis of the act of thinking in thought itself. (p. 139)  As discussed in Chapter 1, O’Sullivan (2006) explored the art encounter as a shift away from the critique of past knowledge, towards the creation of concepts.21 In this act of creation, as Garoian (2013) argued, we resist acts of interpretation and instead become involved in looking away through the body. Affective modes of inquiry produced through the body add complexity 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  21 Concepts, for Deleuze and Guattari (1987), are designed to transform understandings. In other philosophical traditions, concepts might be considered paradoxes or aporias. They are not definitive responses to circumstances or solutions, but more of a compulsion and provocation to think rather than conclude. 	   	   133	  to how we may experience and thus understand particular ideas or perceptions, and in doing so create new understandings. Garoian (2013) argued that art research and practice resist the synthetic closure of interpretation and the binary of what bodies are lacking and instead look to the potential of creative difference. The creative encounter with thought produced through acts of creation characterizes the disposition or conditions of new thought proposed by the arts-based methodology of intuition. I suggest that this methodology may create the conditions of experience for new and creative thought that first problematizes and destabilizes the image of thought by reinhabiting memory and recollection. Under these conditions, alternate understandings form in highly individuated moments of affective intensity, which destabilize discursive and normative understandings. I argue that the arts-based methodology of intuition does not involve experiences that test particular understandings. Rather, experience as the unexpected affective responses bypasses a strict cognitive response, which may disrupt the sedimented nature of normative perceptions. This process aligns with Grosz’s (2004) assertion that intuition is understood through the specificity of living, but I propose that the arts-based methodology of intuition provokes this process for the concerted aims of research and pedagogy.  Deleuze (1991) explored Henri Bergson’s methodology of intuition as a precise methodology involving three distinct acts: “The first concerns the stating and creating of problems; the second, the discovery of genuine differences in kind; the third, the apprehension of real time” (p. 14); from these acts, three primary rules were created, as well as several complementary rules. For Bergson, intuition as a method threads the relationship of duration, memory and élan vital (life force) to knowledge by identifying how the framing of problems forecloses on potentiality; it does this by articulating how the misrecognition of the composites of experience stratifies knowledge, and how time as duration creates the possibility for new and 	   	   134	  creative thought or knowledge. As a method, intuition is a “problematizing method (a critique of false problems and the invention of genuine ones), differentiating (carvings out and intersections), temporalizing (thinking in terms of duration)” (Deleuze, 1991, p. 35, emphasis in the original). As a mode of knowledge that inheres in a body’s capacity to act, intuition draws memory and duration from a psychical event into the real, offering the potential to understand becoming as a continued process of individual differentiation through experience.  These rules serve as the basis for the design of the proposed arts-based methodology of intuition, particularly the reconceptualization of (1) the framing of questions, (2) the understandings of how particular experiences might stratify or disrupt static knowledge, and (3) how the disruption to thought occurs in a durational experience of time rather than space. While these notions underpin this proposed arts-based methodology of intuition, understandings that I gained from Christen’s and Kelsie’s films and our dialogue sessions point to the ways that art practice may complement, extend and elaborate on these rules. This suggests a unique potential for art practice in research and pedagogy to create the conditions for concept creation and new understandings. In the following section, I articulate the three rules that formed the Deleuzian/Bergsonian method for intuition, and the implications of my research findings for arts-based educational research and pedagogy. Rule #1: The stating and creating of problems: Apply the test of true and false problems themselves. Condemn false problems and reconcile truth and creation at the level of problems. (Deleuze, 1991, p. 15)   The first rule of the methodology of intuition specifically looks at the power involved in the constituting of problems, and a complementary precept related to the construction of problems. This rule indicates a fundamental consideration for research and pedagogy, as how we frame and state problems may have a direct impact on how and what knowledge might be 	   	   135	  produced. While this may seem like an obvious consideration, I suggest that how we engage teacher candidates in opportunities in teacher education—including narrative work, reflection and the practicum experience—may affirm rather than disrupt their perceptions of practice. During the planning stages for the first return, and during their second return, both Christen and Kelsie responded to the prompts as though they were problems with solutions requiring discovery to meet my needs as a researcher. Rather than drawing on their own perceptions and memories, the participants drew on more generic and normative understandings of education to respond to the prompts. Christen returned to a classroom, and Kelsie stood in a Christmas vignette; neither space had been part of their direct experience of high school, but perhaps each associated these locations with their normative perceptions of schooling. Both participants imagined what would occur in terms of pedagogy, and instead of drawing their own perceptions and memory into the present for reconsideration, they affirmed their perceptions of various classroom practices, based on normative and generalized understandings.  Deleuze (1991) argued that “[t]rue freedom lies in a power to decide, to constitute problems themselves” (p. 15), and that often the construction of the problem falsely implies that first, the problem exists, and second, a solution exists and awaits discovery. Consequently, this framing of knowledge limits and replicates what is possible and assumes only quantifiable understandings. During their first return, Christen and Kelsie explored the school through affective and sensorial nomadic inquiry, rather than being motivated by constant interpretation. Both participants alluded to this lack of interpretation, in that they could not narrate the return and needed to sit with their films to process what had occurred. This form of inquiry brought new understandings about the mundane and the present absences that shaped their perceptions of teaching.  	   	   136	   This faulty framing of the problem in research limits the potentialities of knowledge by framing possibilities. In teacher education, we often look to problems of classroom management, for example, with which teacher candidates must contend to be successful or “good.” This process of problem, causation and solution presupposes the rationality of the school, the classroom and the particular ways in which what Britzman (2003) terms the “public image” of teaching implies a particular understanding of teacher practice. Extending the topic of classroom management as an object of research, such as Evertson and Weinstein (2006) did, and further reifies the existence rather than the construction of classroom management as a rational component of a rational system of education. This framing suggests that possibilities of knowledge creation follow a linear pathway from problem to causation to solution, disallowing creative thought by drawing primarily on representational knowledge, which is subsequently replicated. As O’Sullivan (2006) argued, “The possible is realized through resemblance and limitation, whereas the virtual is actualized through difference and creation” (p. 100). For Rancière (2007), this faulty framing is expressed as the very logic of the pedagogical relationship: the role assigned to the schoolmaster in that relationship is to abolish the distance between this knowledge and the ignorance of the ignoramus. His lessons and the exercises he sets aim gradually to reduce the gulf separating them. Unfortunately, he can only reduce the distance on condition that he constantly re-creates it. . . . The reason is simple. In pedagogical logic, the ignoramus is not simply one who does not as yet know what the schoolmaster knows. She is the one who does not know what she does not know or how to know it. (p. 8). 	   	   137	  The conceptualization of potentialities rather than possibilities suggests that instead of creating solvable problems, knowledge and experiences create generative opportunities. Creating new potentials draws on alternate forms of thought and experience—such as those of Christen’s and Kelsie’s initial return and filmmaking—to generate diffuse understandings that have not yet been thought of. In their case, the creative act of filmmaking and the affective sensorial response to the school resisted the need to solve a particular constructed problem and instead created the conditions to consider perceptions of schooling through a disruption to both memory and future desires for schooling. For Christen and Kelsie, the experience of the mundane and transitional spaces marked a unique process of exploring memory, where present absences emerged. They made distinct aesthetic choices in their films in the places where their inquiry pushed them to locate their artwork that was under erasure or had never been displayed, to locate the smell of linseed oil conjured as a memory only, or the feelings of anxiety produced in place. As Christen remarked, the experience of the return and filmmaking was unlike reminiscing over photographs, as memories provoked in place were re-inhabited with altered meanings formed in and through the experience. Christen described new meaning she inscribed in her memory of a teacher who she felt had disliked her; yet in the return, she reconsidered her perception of this teacher and, like Kelsie, reflected that experience could change the memory and, with that, other memories. These as yet unknowable potentials formed through their filmmaking and their experience with place.  Deleuze and Guattari (1987) referenced two key concepts related to the stratification or creation of knowledge: tracing and mapping. Rather than being a binary, these terms suggest a relationship of knowing and knowledge that explores dominant, stratified majoritarian knowledges and minoritarian resistance within the dominant system. A tracing follows an 	   	   138	  imaginary line from problem to causation, as “what tracing reproduces of the map or rhizome are only the impasses, blockages, incipient taproots, or points of structuration” (p. 13), while mapping points to generative creative thought. Problems involve a limited number of known possibilities, which trace rather than produce knowledge; as O’Sullivan (2006) argued, “The possible is realized through resemblance and limitation, whereas the virtual is actualized through difference and creation” (p. 100).   Deleuze (1991) elaborated on the notion of false problems by dividing them into two sorts, “non existent problems” and “badly stated questions” (p. 17). The first involves the structuring of knowledge according to difference in kind and difference in degree. Deleuze discussed Bergson’s critique of the binary of more or less—particularly the notion that more is contained in the negation of something than in it’s being, as the negation presupposes the being, plus something else. Deleuze critiqued this notion by arguing that quantifiable questions of more or less, being and negation are structured as a difference in degree, when really they are a qualitative difference in kind. Questions formed around difference in degree assume an exteriority rather than an interiority of difference, and reify binary distinctions and dualisms, including male and female, order and disorder. The possibilities are limited within the structures of binary distinctions, nullifying the potentialities of alternate perspectives, inquiry and understandings.  For Christen and Kelsie, the returns to school and their filmmaking of these experiences required that they think through a different prompt each time. The actual return and processes of filmmaking drew on their highly individuated affective response to place, which produced alternate memories in alternate places. This suggests that how we might make sense of experience—namely, as an object for reflection—may produce responses that draw on 	   	   139	  generalized and normative perceptions within known possibilities, while the return and the sensorial and affective engagement with place offer unique and temporal understandings, perhaps unknowable outside the affective experience.  For Deleuze (1994), this affective response and destabilization of perception through particular types of individuated experience are articulated in his concept of difference as immanent—difference as that of individuated difference, in and of itself a continuous process. Through the ontology of difference, which underpins becoming, Deleuze (1994) argued that difference is formed not between binary groups, but instead individually, during the intersection of perception and affection in the virtual duration, and is subsequently actualized in the “Real” through intuition. The concept of identity is, then, understood not by juxtaposing exteriorities of binary oppositions, such as man and woman, but by exploring how individuals differentiate by drawing on their experiences, memories and desires, actualizing these differences through the activation of intuition in the Real. Consequently, research that attends to difference in this manner tends to depart from humanist conceptualizations of identity and instead explores identity as becoming.  The dynamics of becoming, when any given multiplicity “changes in nature as it expands its connections” (Deleuze, 1987, p. 8), can be considered a distinctive feature of Deleuzian thought: becoming-animal, becoming-woman, becoming world, becoming-child, always becoming-other and always bordering on the element of minority. (Semetsky, 2003, p. 212)  To practice research and pedagogy that attends to these understandings of inquiry, both processes must begin at the level of questions. While other researchers (Alvermann, 2000; St. Pierre, 2000) have pursued this form of knowledge and knowledge construction after the 	   	   140	  empirical research had been performed, I argue that to activate this potential, research must begin with the theoretical framework that underpins a methodology pursuing ontology, rather than retroactively applying the theory. In doing so, the research and pedagogical processes activate intuitive knowledge. Rather than seeking to understand and represent how the teacher candidates’ perceptions changed as a result of the research, the questions that guided the study explored what constitutes the conditions for change (the theoretical work of the methodology of intuition).   In the Prelude, I discussed how my encounter with Lau’s (1994) Room provoked my consideration of the narrative form. In my encounter with Room, my understandings of the potential of narrative were disrupted, which then further provoked the creation of new and alternate ways to learn through rather than from experience. For Garoian (2010), art practice and research provoked new understandings of his experience of seeing the detonation of an atomic bomb, and for O’Donoghue (2011), observing Abramović’s performance The Artist is Present provoked new understandings of art’s potential in the education of children and youths. For Christen and Kelsie, the return and filmmaking activated the potential for attention to be turned to educational practices and perceptions. Yet this process defies an instrumental implementation.   As for me, O’Donoghue (2011) and Garoian (2010), it is unlikely that the art encounter could have been constructed to evoke our particular experiences. While I was interested in Christen’s and Kelsie’s return to school and their filmmaking as possible conditions for a disruption to perceptions of teacher practice, the returns functioned in very different ways for both participants, and so this experience challenges a didactic or instrumental usage in research and pedagogy. Both O’Donoghue’s and Garoian’s experiences with particular artists and their practices allowed for alternate and emergent understandings related to areas of concern or 	   	   141	  interest. These emergent understandings point to the potential for artistic practices in research to create the conditions for the formation of as yet unknowable questions, connections and new understandings. This shifts the potential of experience—for example, in teacher education, from shaping teacher practices within known discourses of teaching towards experience as creating alternate forms of knowledge and knowing. Rule #2: “Struggle against illusion, rediscover the true differences in kind or articulations of the real” (Deleuze, 1991, p. 21). 	   The differences in kind posited by Deleuze suggest that rather than a difference in degree, which forms binary distinctions such as man and woman, intuition creates the conditions to provoke immanent differences in kind. Hence, the concept of difference as an exterior quality that forms normative groupings is displaced for a concept of difference as immanent. This concept also erodes the exterior differences that have emerged from identity politics and marginalized epistemologies discourses. This is distinct from the pedagogical model in teacher education that aims to train teacher candidates in pre-existing models of thought and action in teacher practices (Britzman, 2003). The highly individuated experience with art practices described earlier through O’Donoghue’s (2011) and Garoian’s (2010) work suggests that affective intensity resists an instrumental approach yet may create the conditions to consider ideas of personal, social and political importance.  This rule suggests that to disrupt recognizable exterior categories, the composites of experience must be disrupted through affective, embodied processes as the misrecognition of the composites of experience, which stratify knowledge. Deleuze (1991) argued that two pure presences—memory/recollection and perception—form lines within a durational event, which do not continue as parallel events, distinct from one another as a dualism. He argued that these lines meet and mix and that “this mixture is our experience itself, our representation,” as perception 	   	   142	  and recollection “interpenetrate each other, are always exchanging something” (p. 26). The challenge to new or creative thought in research and pedagogy is this composite, which forms our representation and informs our intellect (intelligence) as that which has the distinct tendency to foreclose on alternate possibilities, relying on the misrecognition of the experience as natural perception (Grosz, 2004). For Grosz, intuition remains distinct from intelligence in that “[i]ntelligence is thus unable to deal with change, evolution, life, or duration. What is new escapes it, for it strives only to extend what it knows, not to question how it knows” (p. 232). For Christen and Kelsie, the exploration of the school space through filmmaking created unique conditions for affective and sensorial responses, which triggered particular types of discussion during our dialogue sessions that opened up rather than foreclosed on new understandings.  For Christen, distinct differences were noted between her processes of articulating the school as an installation and experiencing the school as an installation. When she tried to explain, interpret or articulate the school as an installation, as she did with the second prompt (installation), she drew on intellect and intelligence to first film and then imagine and explain the school space as an installation. In the first return (pedagogical value), though, she moved throughout the school in response to the affective intensity of the return and the memories that were provoked in place. She did not reminisce, as she did in the presence of photographs of her time in school. She embodied the memory of school, as affect produced the weight of her backpack and the dread she had felt when moving up the stairs to her classes. In those moments, interpretation was delayed, because the meaning of the experience had not yet been processed through language. This delay allowed her to respond to her embodied experience and to follow the impulses of affect and memory to explore the hallways, her former locker space, and the edges of her covered paintings, as she discussed relationships and altered memories of her time 	   	   143	  in that school. In these moments, intuition produced through the affective jolt to thought shifted her capacities to act in the space, creating opportunities for different types of exploration.  Intuition as a method works against the tendency to seek the formation of a teaching identity and instead looks to problematizing, differentiating, and temporalizing knowledge formed in and through experience (Marks, 1998). Time as duration is then understood as a mixture, a relational experience wherein the past, present and future coexist. Christen’s memories of teachers and her perceptions of their attitudes towards her became amenable to change as she drew on other experiences and understandings. Intuition moves beyond subjectivity to examine the conditions of experience as duration, disengaging us from intellect, which attends to the spatial and quantifiable difference in degree.  Semetsky (2009) argued that intuition is a pragmatic way of knowing, drawing on the durational virtual interstices of perception and recollection. However, she asserted that to understand how learning or the creation of concepts occurs, we must understand the triadic relationship of percept, affect and concept. This triadic relationship also articulates how the encounter pursues intuition as its knowledge production project. Individuated affective intensity then becomes significant for understanding how intuition forms and is formed by particular types of experience that involve acts of creation. In the following section of this chapter, I explore affect as a form of knowing produced in and through the body. As Hickey-Moody (2013) argued, affect is “a confused idea, affect is what moves us. It’s a hunch. A visceral prompt. Affect is a starting place from which we can develop methods that have an awareness of the politics of aesthetics” (p. 79).  As discussed throughout this dissertation, it is affect that speaks simultaneously to a highly individuated response but also to the connectedness of the body to the world it encounters. 	   	   144	  This enmeshed response creates temporal opportunities for understandings outside of various discourses and thereby disrupts how we may have come to engage with ideas and events in particular ways. Affect creates complexity in thought that previously was caught and limited in binary, rational or circular logic. These ideas are expanded on in the following section to explore the ways in which art practice enables an attentiveness to and perhaps the production of affect, which speaks to the methodological rule of struggling against the illusion of knowledge parameters by attending to difference produced through affective disruptions. Nomadic	  Inquiry:	  Affective	  Intensity	  and	  Intuition	  	  	   At the onset of my research, I anticipated that the participants would respond to the physicality of their schools and that, through sensorial forces, new memories might be provoked in place. I did not anticipate, though, that their affective responses to their schools would in many ways shape how they then moved throughout the school and perhaps how they filmed it. I also did not anticipate that in their return, they would be unable to narrate their experience. I had expected that while they filmed, they would narrate their memories and experiences to communicate both what they were filming and the reasons for filming it. I have come to understand their processes of moving and filming the school through an affective form of inquiry, or what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) described as nomadic inquiry. This form of inquiry is guided by an impulse of sorts, described by Seigworth and Gregg (2010) in the following way: Affect, at its most anthropomorphic, is the name we give to those forces—visceral forces beneath, alongside, or generally other than conscious knowing, vital forces insisting beyond emotion—that can serve to drive us toward movement, toward thought and extension, that can likewise suspend us (as in neutral) across a barely 	   	   145	  registering accretion of force-relations, or that can even leave us overwhelmed by the world’s apparent intractability. (p. 1)   Christen and Kelsie discussed the differences in preparing for the return, and the return itself, through the concepts of memory and experience. I suggest that a distinct difference in the preparation for the return and then the return itself points to how memory and affect create conditions for either generalized, normative understandings or understandings developed through affective responses. For Christen and Kelsie, drawing on memory to respond to the prompts required a process of narrative cohesion, wherein certain experiences described earlier as Dewey’s (1934) an experience melded with other, mundane, aspects of living as anaesthetic. Both Christen’s and Kelsie’s experience of recollected accounts of schooling tended to affirm perceptions of teacher practices and school spaces, while their affective experiences of the return tended to disrupt these normative understandings. For the arts-based methodology of intuition, the affective and sensorial aspects of art practice and experience suggest important departures from methods of recollection, traditional narrative and reflection, in the interest of pursuing art practice as a form of mapping new territories and understandings.  Affective responses, in their varying degrees of intensity, have been drawn on in multiple methodologies, including phenomenology (Merleau-Ponty, 1962), but unlike phenomenology, my research does not ascribe to the study of essences, nor does it suggest that consciousness is fully present. Like Bennett (2005), I posit that affective responses “can be thought provoking as well as emotive” (p. 24). Christen’s and Kelsie’s returns indicated that responses might produce complex thought that resists moral, representational and traditional engagement. Instead of engaging Christen and Kelsie in a process of considering their own teaching as an object of reflection, they were asked to return to school and explore the as yet unknowable sensorial and 	   	   146	  affective experiences that emerged in their return. An affective response may resist the moral and political discourse, allowing for moments of new and creative thought. Thus, as both Christen and Kelsie explored the school space through creative acts in the affective and sensorial return, the binary distinctions and identities of student, student teacher and teacher were displaced. This artistic form of nomadic inquiry was not structured by the discursive normative production of student, teacher or student teacher, and so their movement expressed something and someone other than these identities.  Bennett’s (2005) work, for example, investigated how engagement in non-representational artwork exploring child abuse trauma offered a more complex and nuanced narrative than the typical victim/predator and good/bad by addressing “the moral ambiguities of lived experience or the inherent tension between the experience of sense memory and that of common memory” (p. 27). This affective mode of inquiry offered an asignifying rupture in the discourse of child abuse that created a momentary opportunity to engage with experience in a more complex way, offering alternate understandings outside the normalized and moral discourse.   The drive towards movement—suggested by Seigworth and Gregg (2010) as the movement from duration as a strictly psychical event to the actualization of the virtual in the real—suggests that the disruption to perceptions has the capacity to influence and alter capacities to act. Intuition, much like the concept, does not form as a type of knowledge, but instead shapes how thought is formed, and affective responses are essential in the formation of intuition as a disposition and methodology. Intuition draws our experiences, recollections and affective responses into the real and in doing so performs a temporal assemblage, suggesting a contiguous relationship with the processes of meaning formation and the ways in which intuition informs 	   	   147	  new experiences. Creative thought as concept occurs in the durational event, where percept is amenable to change, as perception becoming through affective disruption or an asignifying rupture. Creative thought suggests that while intuition is informed by experience, it does not form a knowledge that sustains generalizations designed through passive engagement with the material and expressive qualities of assemblages, including people, places and events. Intuition is the process or knowledge becoming that guides how knowledge is performed in particular practices and how knowledge is pursued through inquiry. Semetsky (2009) described this process as forces that constrain thought and forces that shock thought, “that compel one to think: it is learning from a singular experience, which is not representative but affective, that brings forth a shock to thought and produces becoming as a form of intuition” (p. 450).  Perception of practices, then, may undergo a deterritorialization through affective responses provoked in the return and in doing so reterritorialize the new territory of a concept, or new thought or percept, as perception-in-becoming or the perception of that which is not given (Semetsky, 2004). Perception of teacher practices as the recognizable, representational and common sense engagement with what constitutes the image of teacher practice, as well as the understanding of their own capacity to act on it, may be disrupted through affective response to places of schooling. This relationship speaks to the durational event, where this disruption occurs, as the potential for creative thought, then actualized through intuition.   The recognition of duration as accounting for memories, recollections and perceptions through intuition creates a disposition of sorts, to recognize other tacit forms of knowledge and to engage in a process that seek to destabilize processes of knowledge stratification. Our perceptions and memories thereby become amenable to change rather than affirmed through particular experiences. Intuition marks this movement from fixity of knowledge towards 	   	   148	  immanence and becoming, expressing the potential for Christen’s and Kelsie’s affective responses to the return and filmmaking as an art practice.   In the following discussion of the third and final rule of the Deleuzian and Bergsonian methodology of intuition, I explore the conception of time as duration—or, as I discussed in Chapter 3, time as montage—to consider how the conception of time in terms of qualitative differences is distinct from linear time as a quantifiable difference. I suggest that through their art practices and the return, Christen and Kelsie developed an aesthetic of becoming as they filmed particular aspects of their school during points of affective intensity. The filmmaking participated in their engagement with and movement throughout the schools in a nomadic form of inquiry, and their exploration of the space as artists enabled a form of inquiry that shifted away from prescribed identities. Time hence became the virtual confluence of past, present and future desire, enabling a unique form of experience to emerge—one that is significant for the arts-based methodology of intuition. Rule #3: “State problems and solve them in terms of time rather than of space.” (Deleuze, 1991, p. 31)  As discussed in Chapter 3, the concept of time emerged as significant for understanding Christen’s and Kelsie’s experience of the return to their schools and how their art practice enabled an affective form of inquiry. Deleuze (1991) argued that difference in kind (qualitative difference) occurs in duration, while space exists as a quantifiable difference in degree. To clarify, Deleuze describes Bergson’s consideration of the spatial event of a sugar cube, quantifiable in its angles, position and area, its “difference in degrees between that sugar and any other thing” (p. 31). However, if we are interested in the way of being, as a rhythm of duration, we look to how the sugar dissolves, revealing not a difference between the sugar and other objects as externally related, but a difference in kind as it differs from itself; “the substance of a 	   	   149	  thing is what we grasp when we conceive of it in terms of Duration” (Deleuze, 1991, p. 32). If the conception of time draws on duration as the virtual coexistence of past, present and future, then the qualitative differences that suggest immanent difference posit the perpetual becoming, or the ontology of becoming. At the virtual interstices of perception, recollection and affection, duration forms psychical rhythms that produce qualitative differences, often understood as exteriority of differences, but most significantly, it explores how we continue to become without arriving at a particular state.   In Chapter 3, I looked to the experience of time as montage, as simultaneity of past, present and future, to learn through rather than from experience. The design of my research drew on the prompts to dissuade the participants from the tendency to draw on narration and the affirmation of composites of experience, rather than a disruption to them. Christen’s and Kelsie’s engagement with the prompts performed multiples of intelligence, intellect and intuition. These multiples suggested that at times, their engagement provoked the past, present and future as discrete entities, while at other times, they existed simultaneously. The simultaneity of the virtual in the real suggested that in those moments, individuated and affective intensity destabilized the borders between the division of time and thereby created moments when perceptions were disrupted through and by intuition. While arguably many experiences that would not be classified as arts-based may provoke an affective response, my research drew on particular artistic practices as a way to pursue a form of inquiry that attended to the affective intensity of the return.   I suggested that in Christen’s and Kelsie’s return, the affective intensity and intuition produced an aesthetic of becoming whereby, through nomadic inquiry and art practice, Christen and Kelsie moved throughout the school to respond to the confluence or simultaneity of past, 	   	   150	  present and future. Bogue (2003) has suggested: “Time consists not of a string of indivisible, quintessential moments, but a sequence of equidistant, indifferent, and interchangeable instants . . . any-instants-whatever” (p. 22). In the montage construction, these “any-instants-whatever” are fragments that are “expressions of snapshots of time” (Colman, 2001, p. 211), which resist the foreclosure of interpretation. They are performative and in their performance form new assemblages with perceptions and recollections as they are made and remade in the experience of them, pointing to the entangled nature of meaning making.   Deleuze’s (1986a) critique of Bergson’s thesis on movement in cinema is relevant to understanding how the montage destabilizes the static representation of knowledge and the ontologically distinct researcher. Bergson argued that pre-WWI film was composed of stills strung together with artificial movement, a process that mirrors truth creation in the illusion of natural perception. Drawing on filmic construction, Deleuze (1986a) argued that Bergson identified the movement between stills as abstract, because the movement generated in film acceleration through the reels and across the projection light erases the connections and thus produces a unified flow that mimics how meaning is made normal as natural perception, exteriorities of difference, and universals.  In his work on filmic construction and philosophy, Deleuze suggested that the movement provided by post-WWI film offers complexity to how we can think about the relational aspects of space and time through materiality and the concept of duration. In particular, he found fault with Bergson’s thesis and suggested that the movement is within the frame of the image rather than between images; this movement, far from abstract, suggests the virtual actualized in the frame of the shot, sustaining his recurrent philosophy of immanent difference. Deleuze (1986a) asserted that cinema does not give us abstract movement applied to the immobile image: “The 	   	   151	  evolution of the cinema, the conquest of its own essence or novelty, was to take place through montage, the mobile camera and the emancipation of the view point, which became separate from projection” (p. 3).  As I argued in Chapter 2, the freedom of the mobile camera and mise en scène temporally inscribed aesthetic meaning, drawing Christen’s and Kelsie’s virtual into the frame of the shot, and rendering or actualizing the duration of the movement-image. The emancipation of the viewpoint through the handheld camera and the movement of the film across the light of the projector allowed Deleuze to contemplate the mechanistic production of film and the materiality of the artistic production of film as adding particular meaning—style as an aesthetic of difference. This is an important point to consider in terms of analysis and the position of the researcher. I argue that the data, as fragments, are assembled by the filmmaker in particular ways, similar to the way that artists assemble items that form relational and temporal bonds; the filmmaker thereby makes choices based on theoretical aesthetic dispositions. This places the filmmaker and the researcher directly within the analysis and the findings, yet destabilizes their authority in the competing theoretical, material, aesthetic and temporal aspects of montage.  As an object and experience, montage displaces time and the stability of meaning, creating opportunities for new meanings and new connections. The forming of connections is not limited to the linear timeframe of the research interaction. I prefer instead to conceptualize the research process as a contracting and expanding duration, one that allows the encounter to participate in memories and recollections as well as future desires and actualizations. In becoming teacher, there are no beginnings or endings that point to when teacher candidates started becoming a teacher and when they have ended the process by becoming a teacher. The arts-based methodology of intuition is more concerned with intuition as a process that seeks to 	   	   152	  destabilize meaning as it actively seeks meaning. The time of research then departs from a linear model to that of montage in order to provoke new and creative thought. Reterritorializations  The findings, outcomes or understandings that emerged in this research assert that rather than being objects of knowledge, reterritorializations are understood as intuition through which meaning is destabilized even as it is created. Inhering in our capacity to act, intuition forms a disposition of learning to learn that resists acts that form on complete knowing. Through a recursive and rhizomatic process of design, implementation, analysis, redesign and implementation, an arts-based methodology of intuition emerged. This event of my own learning in the midst of creative acts was rendered through a destabilization of my perceptions of the aims and make-up of research, precipitated by my encounter with narrative form and the potential of unmet expectations.  The methodology began with the Deleuzian/Bergsonian rules of the methodology of intuition, which were formed and reformed through theories of aesthetics, contemporary art practice, art education and education research, and most importantly through Christen’s and Kelsie’s return to school, their films and the dialogue sessions. To gain understandings of these events, I explored the embodiment of learning and knowing through the conceptualization and implementation of montage. In doing so, I was able to explore the conceptualization and living of time and experience in non-linear, non-chronological forms focused on the mundane rather than the Event. I conceptualized Christen’s and Kelsie’s return as the embodiment of montage, as particular experiences provoked the living of memory and recollection in the present, creating the potential for these forms of knowing to become amenable to change. I thereby argued that 	   	   153	  experiences that draw on an affective shock to thought might significantly destabilize teacher candidates’ perceptions and perhaps their body’s capacities to act.  The encounter with schooling enabled processes of looking away through the body, which created delays in knowing and interpretation that potentially allowed other complex understandings to emerge. The return to school drew on alternate ways of knowing that memory and recollections were unable to access and that resisted the immediacy of interpretation through language. Alternate memories and inquiries were produced in the schools and in the moments of the return; these memories were not recalled but reinhabited and lived through the body by the production of affect. The participants explored the mundane rather than the Events of schooling, moving in the rhythms of everyday repetition and habit, but reliving them in a way that drew the tacit to the fore. This process resisted the need to elevate the mundane and instead engaged in a form of inquiry that made available the processes of schooling that rest below cognition, shaping and guiding perceptions while remaining outside the field of reflection and narrative inquiry.  This mode of inquiry, which I have described at points as an affective inquiry because it was guided by the body’s inquiry in time and place, offered an aesthetic of becoming. The films extended this bodily inquiry and were made and remade in the discussion sessions; Christen and Kelsie explored the return and the experience of duration as the virtual in the present, the forming of intuition as the recognition of other durations, and the changes in their body’s capacity to act, inquire and explore. Mediated through language, Christen and Kelsie viewed their work and became philosophers of their art and of schools’ political nature.  In Kelsie’s return we considered the enduring qualities of the present absence and the complexity of making sense and non-sense through a sensorial pedagogy of place. This endurance or persistence does not remake and repeat but instead makes the school new in its 	   	   154	  absence and in the ways it provokes a reconsideration of the permanence of schooling. Like Nietzsche’s eternal return, the return to school was one of difference, as memories and recollections came undone. In Christen’s work we considered the rationalization of school spaces, produced through the discourses surrounding schooling and teacher practices. We could consider the ways in which students’ and teachers’ bodies move in spaces as rationalized and thus striated places, rationalizing as they are rationalized, forming in many ways the modes of learning and inquiry available. We could also consider the ways that the irrational unravels the official and offers unique moments of inquiry as the body moves without conscious purpose and instead responds to the affective shock to thought.  Through processes of deterritorialization, this research explored territories of qualitative research, pedagogy and teacher education research, with a specific focus on the destabilization of practices of narrative inquiry and reflexivity. In the shift from epistemology to ontology, time and experience were reimagined and more than critiqued; the aforementioned territories were disarticulated through processes of embodied inquiry and art practice in place. More than different from qualitative research, the arts-based methodology of intuition is difference, in and of itself. What inhered in the body’s capacity to act were the capabilities that emerged to ask different questions and pursue alternate forms of inquiry through and with the body. Methodological Mappings	   The event of learning in the loss of the centered subject has significant implications for arts-based research, teacher education and research methodological considerations. Rather than developing or finding solutions to problems, the arts-based methodology of intuition works with the potential of research and pedagogy to provoke new and unimaginable possibilities. It suggests that a confluence of singularities allows the event of the potential for new and creative 	   	   155	  thought and intuition in the teaching body’s capacity to act. Immanence is pursued as well as social and political change in the territory of schooling in becoming teacher. Deleuze might argue that learning as a line of flight and deterritorialization is a way of being, as ontology of difference that, rather than brought into being, is territorialized by a multitude of practices, conventions and discourses. In this research, I have suggested that impediments to immanence, including the centered “I” of humanism, narrative devices of cohesion and consistency, and practices that affirm rather than confront recognition, are widespread in qualitative research and pedagogy. With the reconfiguration of experience and time, we might come to proceed with inquiry that leaves open new and creative thought, by designing research and pedagogy as a smooth space of inquiry, divested of striations that limit and represent thought rather than provoke a prosthetic juxtaposition.  The arts-based methodology of intuition requires the rethinking of time, experience and identity to yield the potential for an affective disruption to perceptions in the creation of new knowledge. The design of the encounter, as discussed earlier, draws on the Deleuzian virtual of memories and perceptions and the non-representational engagement of thought via the encounter (O’Sullivan, 2006). In this problematizing, differentiating and temporalizing method, intuition potentially enables or engenders creative knowledge by removing particular parameters to knowing and knowledge. This research, Christen and Kelsie’s encounter, the theoretical inquiry, the return to schools and other events in this work are creative acts that, through a confluence of singular micro affects, might or might not allow something new and unpredictable to emerge. These creative acts are simultaneously elaborations of each other as difference emerges in each creative iteration rather than producing sameness. 	   	   156	  Questions outside the scope of this research, but those that provide some future directions for this research and for pedagogical processes, particularly as they relate to teacher education, should explore the implications of the arts-based methodology of intuition, including: Should researchers and pedagogues be involved in thinking the limits of this inquiry in reconceptualizing education? This mode of inquiry draws on art practices to provoke alternate understandings, yet given the individuated responses of the participants, what are the limits, if any, of embodied pedagogy and research?  Should researchers, teachers and teacher candidates be concerned about the knowledge produced, or do questions such as this undermine the value of intuition? Does research need to attend to the knowledge produced or is it sufficient to attend to the experience without considering the types of meanings or understandings produced? Garoian (personal communication 2015) critiques the desire for the necessity of the production of meaning, yet then what do we understand the purposes of research, learning and teaching to be in the absence of meaning? Another consideration for research is in what ways does this mode of inquiry conceptualize change as positive and beneficial? The arts-based methodology of intuition offers a potential for limitless and borderless forms of thinking. I have suggested that intuition is significant for understanding the conditions of change to individual perceptions, as well as perceptions about research and pedagogy’s purposes and products. I have argued that the changes themselves are outside of the scope of this research, but that experiences that draw on affective intensity allow for types of knowledge and knowing that resist normative understandings. My research thereby implies that alterity may engender positive change in teacher candidates’ perceptions of practice as well as their capacities to act, and that the act of thinking is in and of itself critically important to the education of teacher candidates, among 	   	   157	  others. Similar critiques of the inherent valuation of concepts, including McClure’s (2011) critique of the concept of creativity suggest that researchers and teachers attend to their own attachments and valuation of concepts.  This attention must consider how implied value may shape the inquiry process. These questions and considerations are significant for future directions of research that draws on creative, artistic practices to destabilize normative and tacit thought so that new and creative thought might emerge and, with it, new potentials in education.  	   	   158	  References Alvermann, D. E. (2000). Researching libraries, literacies, and lives: A rhizoanalysis. In E. St. Pierre & W. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 114–129). New York, NY: Routledge. Andrews, M., Squire, C., & Tamboukou, M. (2008). What is narrative research? London, UK: Sage. Apple, M. W. (1971). The hidden curriculum and the nature of conflict. Interchange, 2(4), 27–40. Armstrong, V., & Curran, S. (2006). Developing a collaborative model of research using digital video. Computers and Education, 46, 336–347. Atkinson, D. (2004). Theorising how student teachers form their identities in initial teacher education. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3) 379–394. Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity (J. Howe, Trans.). London, UK: Verso Press. Badiou, A. (2000). Deleuze: The clamor of being (L. Burchell, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Baugh, B. (1992). Transcendental empiricism: Deleuze’s response to Hegel. Man and World, 25, 133–148. Benjamin, G. (2013, December 24). Civilisation on the couch: Theorising multi-levelled psychoanalytical arts practice: Part of the “Practice Makes Perfect” forum on practice-based research. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. doi:10.1177/1474022213514551 Bennett, J. (2005). Empathic vision: Affect, trauma, and contemporary art. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 	   	   159	  Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Bennett, J. (2012). Practical aesthetics: Events, affects and art after 9/11. London, UK: I.B. Tauris. Bergson, H. (1988). Matter and memory (N. M. Paul & W. S. Palmers, Trans.). New York, NY: Zone Books. Bergson, H. (1998). Creative evolution (A. Mitchell, Trans.). New York, NY: Dover Publications. Bird, T. (2011). Figuring materiality. Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, 16(1), 5–15. Bogue, R. (2003). Deleuze on cinema. New York, NY: Routledge. Bogue, R. (2004). Search, swim and see: Deleuze’s apprenticeship in signs and pedagogy of images. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(3), 327–342. Bolt, B. (2004). Art beyond representation: The performative power of the image. London, UK: I.B. Tauris. Book, C. (1983). Student expectations and teacher education traditions with which we can and cannot live. Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 9–13. Boundas, C.V. Roffe, J. (2005). Virtual/Virtuality. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 296-299). New York, NY: Columbia University Press Boulton-Funke, A. (2009). Visual art and traditional schools in British Columbia: A case study of context in the classroom (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. 	   	   160	  Bowles, S. N. (2001). Deconstructing disability and (special) education: A rhizoanalysis. Retrieved from http://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/handle/10724/20289 Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1975). The problem with human capital theory—a Marxian critique. American Economic Review, 65(2), 74–82. Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Britzman, D. P. (1986). Cultural myths in the making of a teacher: Biography and social structure in teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, (56)4, 442–456. Britzman, D. (2000). “The question of belief”: Writing poststructural ethnography. In E. St. Pierre & W. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 27–40). New York, NY: Routledge,. Britzman, D. (2003). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Britzman, D. P. (2009). The very thought of education: Psychoanalysis and the impossible profession. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Buchanan, I., & MacCormack, P. (Eds.). (2008). Deleuze and the schizoanalysis of cinema. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing. Bullock, A. L., & Gailbraith, L. (1992). Images of art teaching: Comparing the beliefs and practices of two secondary art teachers. Studies in Art Education, 33(2), 86–97. Butler, C. (2007). Art and feminism: An ideology of shifting criteria. In L. G. Mark (Ed.) Wack! Art and the feminist revolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Butler, D. (2005). Giving an account of oneself. New York, NY: Fordham University Press. 	   	   161	  Carnahan, T., & McFarland, S. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: Could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(5), 603–614. Carter, K. (1993). The place of story in the study of teaching and teacher education. Educational Researcher, 22(1), 5–12, 18. Cherubini, L. (2008). Teacher-candidates’ perceptions of school climate: A mixed methods investigation. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 39–54. Cole, A. L., & Knowles, J. G. (1993). Shattered images: Understanding expectations and realities of field experiences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(5), 457–471. Connelly, M. F., & Clandinin D.J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5) 2–14. Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge: A study of teachers’ classroom images. Curriculum Inquiry, 15(4), 361–385. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1987). Teachers’ personal knowledge: What counts as “personal” in studies of the personal. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 487–500.  Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Colebrook, C. (2006). Deleuze: A guide for the perplexed. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing. Colman, F. (2011). Deleuze and cinema: The film concepts. Oxford, UK: Berg. Conley, V. (2005). Minoritarian. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 164–165). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. 	   	   162	  Costa, M. (2004, March). Teacher adaptations to an open area teaching and learning environment Educational Insights, 8(3). Retrieved from http://www.ccfi.educ.ubc.ca/publication/insights/v08n03/articles/costa.html Davies, B., De Schauwer, E., Claes, L., De Munck, K., Van De Putte, I., & Verstichele, M. (2013). Recognition and difference: A collective biography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 680–691. de Certeau, M. (1988). The practice of everyday life. Berkley, CA: University of California Press. De Freitas, E. (2007). Research fictions: Arts-informed narratives that disrupt the authority of the text. Interchange, 38(4), 335–350. DeLanda, M. (2006). Deleuzian social ontology and assemblage theory. In M. Fuglsang &  B. M. Sørensen (Eds.), Deleuze and the social (pp. 250–266). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Deleuze, G. (1986a). Cinema 1: The movement-image (H. Tomlinson & B. Habberjam, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, G. (1986b). Cinema 2: The time-image (H. Tomlinson & R. Galeta, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, G. (1990). Logic of sense (M. Lester, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G. (1991). Bergsonism (H. Tomlinson & B. Habberjam, Trans.). New York, NY: Zone Books. Deleuze, G. (1993). The fold: Leibniz and the Baroque (T. Conley, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. 	   	   163	  Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition (P. Patton, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G. (1995). Negotiations: 1972–1990 (M. Joughin, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G. (2001). Pure immanence: Essays on a life (A. Boyman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1986). Kafka: Toward a minor literature (D. Polan, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, G., &. Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, G., &. Guattari, F. (1994). What is philosophy? (H. Tomlinson & G. Burchell, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Demaria, C. (2004). The performative body of Marina Abramović rerelating (in) time and space. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 11(3), 295–307. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York, NY: Berkley Publishing Group. Eisner, E. W. (1976). Making the arts a reality in the schools of tomorrow: An agenda for today. Art Education, 29(3), 20–24. Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn’t this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(3), 297–324. Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of learning: Media architecture pedagogy. New York, NY: Routledge. Ellsworth, E., & Miller, J. (1996). Working difference in education. Curriculum Inquiry, 26(3), 245–263. 	   	   164	  Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (2006). Classroom management as a field of inquiry. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 3–16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Fanthome, C. (2006). The influence and treatment of autobiography in confessional art: Observations on Tracey Emin’s feature film Top Spot. Biography, 29(1), 30–42. Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban high school. New York, NY: SUNY Press. Flewitt, R. (2005). Using video to investigate preschool classroom interaction: Education research assumptions and methodological practices. Visual Communication, 5(1), 25–50. Fowler, C. (2013). The clock: Gesture and cinematic replaying. Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media, 54(2), 226–242. Fuller, G. (2013). Towards an archaeology of “know-how.” Cultural Studies Review, 19(1), 271–295. Gale, K. (2010). An inquiry into the ethical nature of a Deleuzian creative educational practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(5), 303–309. Garoian, C. R. (2001). Performing the museum. Studies in Art Education, 42(3), 234-248. Garoian, C. R. (2008). Verge of collapse: The pro/thesis of art research. Studies in Art Education, 49(3), 176–188. Garoian, C. R. (2010). Drawing blinds: Art practice as prosthetic visuality. Studies in Art Education, 51(2), 218–234. 	   	   165	  Garoian, C. R. (2013). The prosthetic pedagogy of art: Embodied research and practice. New York, NY: SUNY Press. Gess-Newsome, J., Southerland, S.A., Johnston, A., & Woodbury, S. (2003). Educational reform, personal practical theories, and dissatisfaction: The anatomy of change in college science teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 731–767. Grauer, K. (1998). Beliefs of preservice teachers toward art education. Studies in Art Education, 39(4), 350–370. Grossman, A. (2013). Filming in the light of memory. In C. Suhr & R. Willerslev (Eds.), Transcultural montage (pp. 198–212). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Grosz, E. (2001). Architecture from the outside: Essays on virtual and real space. London, UK: MIT Press Cambridge. Grosz, E. (2004). The nick of time: Politics, evolution, and the untimely. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Grosz, E. (2008). Chaos, territory, art: Deleuze and the framing of the earth. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Grosz, E. (2011). Becoming undone: Darwinian reflections on life, politics, and art. Durham, NC. Duke University Press. Grosz, E. (2013). Habit today: Ravaisson, Bergson, Deleuze and us. Body & Society, 19(2&3), 217–239. Hall, S. (2000). Who needs “identity”? In P. du Gay, J. Evans, & P. Redman (Eds.), Identity: A reader (pp. 15–30). London, UK: Sage. Hemmings, C. (2005) Invoking affect. Cultural Studies, 19(5), 548–567. 	   	   166	  Hickey-Moody, A. (2013). Affect as method: Feelings, aesthetics and affective pedagogy. In R. Coleman & J. Ringrose (Eds.), Deleuze and research methodologies (pp. 79–95). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Highmore, B. (2010). Homework: Routine, social aesthetics and the ambiguity of everyday life. Cultural Studies, 18 (2–3), 306–327. Høgel, J. K. (2013). Montage as analysis in ethnographic and documentary filmmaking: From hunting for plots toward weaving baskets of data. In C. Suhr & R. Willerslev (Eds.), Transcultural montage (pp. 213–225). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Honan, E. (2007). Writing a rhizome: An (im)plausible methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(5), 531–546. Humble, P. N. (1982). Duchamp’s readymades: Art and anti-art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 22(1), 52–64. Irwin, R. L. (2006). Walking to create an aesthetic and spiritual currere. Visual Arts Research 32(1), 75–82. Irwin, R. L., Beer, R., Springgay, S., Grauer, K., Xiong, G., & Bickel, B. (2006). The rhizomatic relations of a/r/tography. Studies in Art Education 48(1), 70–88. Irwin, R. L. & O’Donoghue, D. (2012). Encountering pedagogy through relational art practices. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 31(3), 222–236. Jackson, A. Y. (2013). Posthumanist data analysis of mangling practices. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 741–748. Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (Eds.). (2008). Voice in qualitative inquiry: Challenging conventional, interpretive, and critical conceptions in qualitative research. New York, NY: Routledge. 	   	   167	  Jackson, A. Y. & Mazzei, L. A. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research. London, UK: Routledge. jagodzinski, j., & Wallin, J. (2013) Arts-based research: A critique and a proposal. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Johnstone, S. (Ed.). (2008). The everyday: Documents of contemporary art. London, UK: Whitechapel. Kalin, N. (2014). Art’s pedagogical paradox. Studies in Art Education, 55(3), 190–202. Kaufmann, J. (2010). Trans-representation. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(2), 104–115. Kemmis, S. (1980). Action research in retrospect and prospect. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Sydney, Australia. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559–604). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kennedy, B. M. (2004). Deleuze and cinema: The aesthetics of sensation. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Lachapelle, R. (1999). Informant-made videos: A research and educational tool. Studies in Art Education, 40(3), 242–257. Lather, P., & St. Pierre, E. (2013). Post-qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 629–633. Lau, Y. (2006–2007). Room. Toronto Free Gallery. Retrieved from http://torontofreegallery.org/exhibitions/season-3/ione-thorkelson-yam-lau/ Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Maldon, MA: Blackwell. 	   	   168	  Lefebvre, H. (2002). Critique of everyday life: Foundations for a sociology of the everyday (Vol. 2). (J. Morre, Trans.). London, UK: Verso. Lefebvre, H. (2008). Critique of everyday life (Vol. 1). (J. Morre, Trans.). London, UK: Verso. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2012). A diffractive and Deleuzian approach to analyzing interview data. Feminist Theory, 13(3), 265–281. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2013). Images of thinking in feminist materialisms: Ontological divergences and the production of researcher subjectivities. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 706–716. Lynch, M. (2000). Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge. Theory, Culture & Society, 17(3), 26–54. MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667. Margolis, E. (1990). Visual ethnography: Tools for mapping the AIDS epidemic. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 19(3), 370–391. Margolis, E. (2004). Looking at discipline, looking at labour: Photographic representations of Indian boarding schools. Visual Studies, 19(1), 72–96. Margolis, E. (2008). Through a lens darkly: U.S. urban schools and the photographic imagination. Bifurcaciones revista de estudios cuturales urbanos, 7, 1–16. Marina Abramović, Rhythm 0 1974 http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-liverpool/display/dla-piper-series-constellations/marina-abramovic-rhythm-0-1974 Marks, J. (1998). Gilles Deleuze: Vitalism and multiplicity. London, UK: Pluto Press. 	   	   169	  Martin, A. D., & Kamberelis, G. (2013). Mapping not tracing: Qualitative educational research with political teeth. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 668–679. Masny, D. (2013). Rhizoanalytic pathways in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(5), 339–348. Massumi, B. (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Matthews, B., & Jessel, J. (1998). Reflective and reflexive practice in initial teacher education: A critical case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(2), 231–243. Mazzei, L. A. (2010). Thinking data with Deleuze. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 511–523. Mazzei, L. A. (2013). A voice without organs: Interviewing in posthumanist research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 732–740. Mazzei, L. A., & McCoy, K. (2010). Thinking with Deleuze in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 503–509. McClure, M. (2011). Child as totem: Redressing the myth of inherent creativity in early childhood. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education, 52(2), 127–141. McIntyre, A. (2003). Through the eyes of women: Photovoice and participatory research as tools for reimagining place. Gender, Place and Culture, 10(1), 47–66. McLaren, P. (1988). The liminal servant and the ritual roots of critical pedagogy. Language Arts, 65(2), 164–180. Meigh-Andrews, C. (2013). A history of video art. London, UK: Bloomsbury. 	   	   170	  Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London, UK: Routledge. Message, K. (2005). Body without organs. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 32–34). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Mitchell, C., Weber, S., & O’Reilly-Scanlon, K. (2005). Just who do we think we are? Arts-based methodologies for self-study. London, UK: Routledge. Munby, H. (1982). The place of teachers’ beliefs in research on teacher thinking and decision making, and an alternative methodology. Instructional Science, 11(3), 201–225. Munby, H. (1984). A qualitative approach to the study of a teacher’s beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(1), 27–38. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317–328. Nguyen, M. (n.d.). Unfolding evanesces: Hutong House and Room. G-101 Exhibitions. Retrieved from http://www.gallery101.org/content.php?lan=en&col=6&sub=yam-lau&act=exhibitions&lev=1 Noddings, N., & Shore, P. J. (1984). Awakening the inner eye: Intuition in education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. O’Brien, L. M., & Martha Schillaci, M. (2002). Why do i want to teach, anyway? Utilizing autobiography in teacher education. Teaching Education, 13(1), 25–40. O’Donoghue, D. (2007). “James always hangs out here”: Making space for place in studying masculinities at school. Visual Studies, 22(1), 63–73. O’Donoghue, D. (2009). Are we asking the wrong questions in arts-based research? Studies in Art Education, 50(4), 352–368. 	   	   171	  O’Donoghue, D. (2010). Classrooms as installations: A conceptual framework for analysing classroom photographs from the past. History of Education: Journal of the History of Education Society, 39(3), 401–415. O’Donoghue, D. (2011). Art education for our time: Promoting education over conservatism. In K. Grauer, R. Irwin, & M. Emme (Eds.), StARTing with… (3rd ed., pp. 158–167). Toronto, ON: Canadian Society for Education through Art. O’Donoghue, D. (2014). The prosthetic pedagogy of art scholarship. Studies in Art Education, 55(3), 258–261. O’Sullivan, S. (2006). Art encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought beyond representation. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. O’Sullivan, S. (2010). From aesthetics to the abstract machine: Deleuze, Guattari and contemporary art practice. In S. Zepke & S. O’Sullivan (Eds.), Deleuze and contemporary art (pp. 189–207). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. O’Sullivan, S. (2012). On the production of subjectivity: Five diagrams of the finite-infinite relation. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. Phelan, A. M. (2005). A fall from (someone else’s) certainty: Recovering practical wisdom in teacher education. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 339–358. Pillow, W. S. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), 175–196. 	   	   172	  Pitt, A., & Britzman, D. (2003). Speculations on qualities of difficult knowledge in teaching and learning: An experiment in psychoanalytic research. Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(6), 755–776. Pollock, G. (2008). Dying, seeing, feeling: Transforming the ethical space of feminist aesthetics. In D. Costello & D. Willsdon (Eds.), The life and death of images (pp. 213–235). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Poxon, J. L., & Stivale, C. J. (2005). Sense series. In C. J. Stivale (Ed.), Gilles Deleuze: Key concepts (pp. 67–79). Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Rancière, J. (2013). Aisthesis: Scenes from the aesthetic regime of art. Brooklyn, NY: Verso. Rancière, J., & Parker, A. (Ed.). (2007). The philosopher and his poor (J. Drury, C. Oster, & A. Parker, Trans.). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F. (1992). Contextual effects on the self-perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65(2), 150–167. Reason, P., & Torbert, W. (2001). The action turn: Toward a transformational social science. Concepts and Transformation, 6(1), 1–37. Richardson, J., & Walker, S. (2011). Processing process: The event of making art. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education, 53(1), 6–19. Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another (K. Blamey, Trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Roffe, J. (2005). Simulacrum. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 250–251). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Rosiek, J. L. (2013). Pragmatism and post-qualitative futures. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 692–705. 	   	   173	  Ruitenberg, C. W. (2011). Art, politics, and the pedagogical relation. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 30(2), 211–223. Ruitenberg, C. W. (2012). Learning by walking: Non-formal education as curatorial practice and intervention in public space. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 31(3), 261–275. Ruitenberg, C. W. (2014). On consumerism, collective action, and whether art teaches anything. Educational Theory, 64(2), 179–194. Sameshima, P. (2009). Stop teaching! Hosting an ethical responsibility through a pedagogy of parallax. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 6(1), 11–18. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in practice. New York, NY: Basic Books. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books. Seigworth, G. J., & Gregg, M. (2010). An inventory of shimmers. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 1–25). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Semetsky, I. (2003). The problematics of human subjectivity: Gilles Deleuze and the Deweyan legacy. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 22, 211–225. Semetsky, I. (2004). The role of intuition in thinking and learning: Deleuze and the pragmatic legacy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(4), 433–454. Semetsky, I. (2009). Deleuze as a philosopher of education: Affective knowledge/effective learning. The European Legacy, 14(4), 443–456. Semetsky, I. (2010). The folds of experience, or: Constructing the pedagogy of values. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 42(4), 476–488. 	   	   174	  Sheerin, D. (2009). Deleuze and Ricoeur: Disavowed affinities and the narrative self. London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group. Springgay, S. (2011). “The Chinatown Foray” as sensational pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 41(5), 636–656. Springgay, S., Irwin, R. L., & Wilson-Kind, S. (2005). A/r/tography as living inquiry through art and text. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(6), 897–912. St. Pierre, E. (2000). Nomadic inquiry in the smooth spaces of the field: A preface. In E. St. Pierre & W. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 258–283). New York, NY: Routledge. St. Pierre, E. (2001). Coming to theory: Finding Foucault and Deleuze. In K. Weiler (Ed.), Feminist engagements: Reading, resisting, and revisioning male theorists in education and cultural studies (pp.141–159). New York, NY: Routledge. St. Pierre, E. A. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), 175–189. St. Pierre, E. A. (2012). Another postmodern report on knowledge: Positivism and its others. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(4), 483–503. St. Pierre, E. A. (2013). The posts continue: Becoming. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 646–657. Stagoll, C. (2005). Event. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 87–88). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.  Suhr, C., & Willerslev, R. (2013). Transcultural montage. New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Sullivan, G. (2006). Research acts in art practice. Studies in Art Education, 48(1), 19–35. Sullivan, G. (2010). Art practice as research: Inquiry in visual arts. Los Angles, CA: Sage. 	   	   175	  Swanson, K. W. (2010). Constructing a learning partnership in transformative teacher development. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 11(2), 259–269. Tamboukou, M. (2008a). A Foucauldian approach to narratives. In M. Andrews, C. Squire, & M. Tamboukou. (Eds.), What is narrative research? (pp. 102–120). London, UK: Sage. Tamboukou, M. (2008b). Re-imagining the narratable subject. Qualitative Research, 8(3), 283–292. Tamboukou, M. (2010). Working with stories as multiplicities, opening up the black box of the archive. Life Writing, 7(1), 19–33. Taylor, S. (2006). Narrative as construction and discursive resource. Narrative inquiry, 16(1), 94–102. Unrath, K., & Kerridge, D. (2009). Becoming an art teacher: Storied reflections of two preservice students. Studies in Art Education, 50(3), 272–286. Valkanova, Y., & Watts, M. (2007). Digital story telling in a science classroom: Reflective self-learning (RSL) in action. Early Child Development and Care, 177(6–7), 793–807. Verevis, C. (2005). Minoritarian + cinema. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 166–167). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Wallin, J. (2013). Contemporary currents. In j. jagodzinski & J. Wallin (Eds.), Arts-based research: A critique and a proposal (pp. 53–84). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Warin, J., Maddock, M., Pell, A., & Hargreaves, L. (2006). Resolving identity dissonance through reflective and reflexive practice in teaching. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 7(2), 233–245. 	   	   176	  Weinstein, C. S. (1988). Preservice teachers’ expectations about the first year of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1), 31–40. White, S. A. (2003). Participatory video: Images that transform and empower. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Willerslev, R., & Suhr, C. (2013). Introduction. Montage as an amplifier of invisibility. In C. Suhr, & R. Willerslev (Eds.), Transcultural montage (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Zembylas, M. (2003). Emotions and teacher identity: A poststructural perspective. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 9(3), 213–238. Zepke, S. (2010). Anita Fricek: Contemporary painting as institutional critique. In S. Zepke & S. O’Sullivan (Eds.), Deleuze and contemporary art (pp. 63–82). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Zepke, S., & O’Sullivan, S. (2010). Deleuze and contemporary art. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.   	   	   177	  Appendix   After I received ethical approval from BREB, I asked an instructor in EDCP to introduce and explain the research to the secondary visual art cohort in the University of British Columbia’s (UBC) teacher education program and to provide them with a letter explaining the research as well as a letter of consent for their review. Following a letter approved by BREB, the instructor outlined the purpose of the study and explained the time commitments. I attended the class, explained the process in additional detail and answered any questions that they had at the time. All students were asked to participate with the exception to the following exclusions: 1. Participants needed to be able to communicate in English because of the focus on  dialogue in the sessions. 2. Participants needed to have attended a school in the Lower Mainland of British  Columbia in order to participate as they needed to be able to return to the school  without disrupting their program. 3. Students needed to remain enrolled in the teacher education program over the course of  the study. Initially, four students offered to participate, but one student later declined because of work commitments and one other student did not meet the requirements, as she could not return to her high school as it was out of the country.   I emailed the students who agreed to participate and we met on October 10, 2012 to review the research process and to answer any questions that they might have. We met to review the letter of consent that outlined their rights as participants, particularly the right to withdraw. They were informed that anonymity was not guaranteed, given the visual nature of the work and that they would proceed with the understanding that they could be identified. They were 	   	   178	  informed that should they chose to withdraw during the research process that any images of their likeness would be digitally obscured, but because the dialogue sessions were also filmed, this film would not be excluded.  Once students reviewed and signed the consent forms, they provided me with the name of the school they wished to return. I contacted both principals and I delivered the Initial Contact letter to the school for their review. Within a week of delivering the letter, I met with both principals to discuss any questions or concerns that they might have. Both principals signed the letter of consent and the participants provided the dates that they wished to attend the schools.   In addition to the prompts, I asked participants to film the school after the last dismissal bell to avoid ethical problems with filming high school students. They were also asked not to specifically identify the school by filming notices, signs etc. with the school’s name on it nor were they to film photographs of students who attended. Camera operating instruction were provided to participants and they were asked to notify me of the date and time they wished to return to the school so that I could assure that the school was open and that administration remembered that they were allowed to be present.  Christen returned to her high school in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia on October 16th and Kelsie returned on October 18th, 2012. I picked up the cameras from the participants on and November 7th as Kelsie wanted to return to film the outside of the school at a later date. I downloaded and reviewed the films, which I used to make notes and develop questions for our first dialogue session.   	  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items