本研究旨在探討於台灣高等藝術教育下的視覺藝術碩士班學生，對於書寫創作論述的學習任務中所擁有之學習經驗。以及針對創作論述在學院教育內所扮演之角色，其任務所帶給學生的學習感受進行分析討論。本研究採用個案研究方法，研究對象以五位畢業於高等藝術教育學校之視覺藝術創作類碩士班學生，藉由事先查閱五位研究對象所寫之創作論述論文，延伸出對於該階段訪問提問，進行深度訪談，收取兩類文本則成為本研究之研究資料。經由研究結果之分析發現，學生對於撰寫創作論述的學習經驗會受到其寫作類型而影響，分別為實務型導向與創作歷程導向之類型，面臨不同之寫作的困難。學生提到的困擾則有不同面向，有查照文獻而面對寫作方向的迷失、論述能否寫入自己的故事與如何選擇文字轉譯創作歷程等，經歷各種狀況的焦慮。然而，於經驗中學生同時提出於當時善用身邊的資源，尋求與教師的深度談話獲得領悟、多次的審閱自己的筆記而做出寫作的檢核以及游移於創作與寫作之間的行動獲得新洞見等。學生在過程感受到寫作論述如同給予創作灌注力量，進而幫助自己突破了寫作的僵局。學生對寫作後的學習經驗進行反思與檢視，發現書寫論述增進自己對創作概念的發展，例如:提升自己對創作的表達層次、梳理創作脈絡中的遺珠而成為未來的創作想法、建立屬於自己的創作方法學等，習得各項軟技能讓創作的能量得以持續推動自己。最後依據研究結果，給予學院機構之相關課程建議，其內容作為以學生的觀點出發，由下而上發的，對於學院教學的藝術家培育教育之想法回饋。

The main purpose of this research is to discuss the major factors affecting how students major in fine art writing artist statement based on their own creation. In general, individual learning experience and high art education both play a critical role. The core research is based on case study, selecting students graduated from five different Universities. A preview of interviewer artist statement and thorough interview questions derived from his/her artist statement are needed prior to any One-On-One interview. Two types of contexts were collected during the interview: interviewer artist statement and content from the interview. According to the analysis, different type of genre tends to have huge impact on the artist statement construction. Especially when interviewers deal with practical-based or creative process type of genre, they tend to face varied difficulties generating artist statement. For example, some may loss the direction because of references. Some may have problem converting individual experience into contexts. Therefore, interviewer may take advantage of using resources around them, obtaining recommendation from advisors, continuously inspecting prior note-taking collection, and acquiring new knowledge through cross compare creative fine art and its artist statement. Often time interviewer realizes the core of their artist statement and overcomes the obstacles, leading to realization of creative fine art. Furthermore, the reflection from post- artist statement writing also strengthens the future development of creative fine art. For instance, interviewer may reveal multi-faceted expression or even taking advantages of their weakness during art creation progress. Such strategies are beneficial for building his/her own art creation method and strengthen the energy for continuous art creation. In conclusion, the art courses design recommendation is summarized.

英文

Barzman, K.-e. (2000). The Florentine Academy and the Early Modern Sate: The Discipline of Disegno. . Cambridge University Press.
Bennett, A. (2006). Design Studies: Theory and Research in Graphic Design.New York. Princeton Architectural Press.
Botella, M., Glaveanu, V. P., Zenasni, F., Storme, M., Myszkowski, N., Wolff, M.,et al. (2013). How artists create: Creative process and multivariate factors. Learning and Individual Differences(26), 161–170.
Botella, M., Zenasni, F., & Lubart, T. (2018). What Are the Stages of the Creative Process? What Visual Art Students Are Saying [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02266
Candy, L. (2006). Practice based research: A guide. CCS report, 1(2), 1-19.
Collinson, J. A. (2005). Artistry and analysis: student experiences of UK practice‐based doctorates in art and design. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18(6), 713-728.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Getzels, J. W. ( 1976). he Creative Vision: A Longitudinal Study of Problem Finding in Art. John Wiley & Sons.
Dahlstedt, P. (2012). Between Material and Ideas: A Process-Based Spatial Model of Artistic Creativity. In (pp. 205-233). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31727-9_8
Daichendt, G. J. (2011). Artist Scholar: Reflections on Writing and Research. Intellect Books.
Dewey, J. (2005). Art as experience. In S. D. Ross (Ed.), Art and Its Significance: An Anthology of Aesthetic Theory, (pp. 204-221). State University of New York Press.
Efland, A. D. (1990). History of Art Education: Intellectual and Social Currents in Teaching the Visual Arts. Teachers College Press.
Eisner, E. W. (1985). The art of educational evaluation: A personal view. The Falmer Press.
Elkins, J. (2009). Artists with PhDs: On the new doctoral degree in studio art. New Academia Publishing Washington, DC.
Freitas, N. (2007). Activating a Research Context in Art and Design Practice. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010214
Friedman, K. (2000). Creating design knowledge: from research into practice. In IDATER 2000 conference Loughborough.
Gray, C., & Malins, J. (2004). Visualizing research: A guide to the research process in art
and design. Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315547923
Hannula, M. (2008). Catch me if you can: Chances and challenges of artistic research. . 2(3), 1-20.
Haseman, B., & Mafe, D. (2009). Acquiring know-how: Research training for practice-led researchers. In R. S. Dean, H (Ed.), Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative Arts. (pp. 211-228). Edinburgh University Press,.
Hjelde, K. (2020). Showing-knowing: the exhibition, the student, and the higher education art institution. Journal of Visual Art Practice, 19(1), 69-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702029.2020.1732613
Hockey, J. (2007). United Kingdoms’ art and design practice-based PhDs: Evidence from students and their supervisors. Studies in Art Education, 48(2), 155-171.
Hocking, D. (2021). Artist’s statements, ‘how to guides’ and the conceptualisation of creative practice. English for Specific Purposes, 62, 103-116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.12.006
Jovinelly, J., & Netelkos, J. (2006). The Crafts And Culture of a Medieval Manor Rosen Central.
Joyce, J., Gabler, H. W. (2013). Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. .
Knowles, J. G., & Cole, A. L. (2008). Handbook of the Arts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives, Methodologies, Examples, and Issues. Los Angeles, CA. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452226545
Koch, T. (1996). Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: Philosophy, rigour and representation. Journal of advanced nursing, 24(1), 174-184.
Koch, T. (1999). An interpretive research process: Revisiting phenomenological and hermeneutical approaches. Nurse Researcher, 6(3), 20.
Kozbelt, A., & Seeley, W. P. (2007). Integrating art historical, psychological, and neuroscientific explanations of artists' advantages in drawing and perception. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1, 80-90. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.80
Locher, P. J. (2010). How does a visual artist create an artwork? In The Cambridge handbook of creativity. (pp. 131-144). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511763205.010
Mace, M.-A., & Ward, T. (2002). Modeling the Creative Process: A Grounded Theory Analysis of Creativity in the Domain of Art Making. Creativity Research Journal - CREATIVITY RES J, 14, 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_5
May, W. T. (1993). “Teachers-as-Researchers” or Action Research: What is It, and What Good is it for Art Education? Studies in Art Education, 34(2), 114-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.1993.11651895
McCutcheon, G., & Jung, B. (1990). Alternative perspectives on action research. Theory Into Practice, 29(3), 144-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849009543447
McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice. Routledge.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Mey, K. (2006). The gesture of writing. . In K. Macleod & L. Holdridge (Eds.), Thinking Through Art : Reflections on Art as Research (1st ed., pp. 201–212). Routledge.
Miall, R. C., & Tchalenko, J. (2001). A Painter's Eye Movements: A Study of Eye and Hand Movement during Portrait Drawing. Leonardo, 34, 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1162/002409401300052488
Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., & Hays, T. (2008). In-Depth Interviewing: Principles, Techniques, Analysis.
Parsons, M. J. (1992). Chapter IV: Cognition as Interpretation in Art Education. Teachers College Record, 93(6), 70–91. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/016146819209300605
Pearson, J., Naselaris, T., Holmes, E. A., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2015). Mental imagery: functional mechanisms and clinical applications. Trends in cognitive sciences, 19(10), 590-602.
Pevsner, N. (1973). Academies of Art : Past and Present. Da Capo Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1991). From text to action (K. Blamey & J. B. Thompson, Trans.). Evanston, IL.
Runco, M. A. (1994). Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Ablex Publishing.
Rust, C. M., Judith; Till, Jeremy. (2007). AHRC research review: Practice-led research in art, design and architecture.
Schön, D. A. (2017). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. . Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473
Scrivener, S. (2000). Reflection in and on action and practice in creative-production doctoral projects in art and design. Working Papers in art and design, 1(1).
Steedman, P. (1991). On the relations between seeing, interpreting and knowing. Research & reflexivity, 53, 62.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In Handbook of creativity. (pp. 3-15). Cambridge University Press.
Sullivan, G. (2004). Studio art as research practice.In E. W. Eisner and M. D. Day (Eds.). In Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 795-814). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sullivan, G. (2005). Art practice as research : inquiry in the visual arts. Thousand Oaks, Calif. Sage Publications.
Sullivan, G. (2006). Research Acts in Art Practice. Studies in Art Education, 48, 19-35. https://doi.org/10.2307/25475803
Sullivan, G. (2009). Making space: The purpose and place of practice-led research. In (pp. 41-65). https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748636303-003
Sullivan, G. (2010). Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in Visual Arts.
Weisberg, R. (1986). Creativity: Genius and other myths. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
Weisberg, R. W. (2004). On Structure in the Creative Process: A Quantitative Case-Study of the Creation of Picasso's Guernica. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 22, 23-54. https://doi.org/10.2190/EH48-K59C-DFRB-LXE7
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research Design and Methods: Applied Social Research and Methods Series （2nd ed..). Sage Publications Inc. .
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research : design and methods （Fifth ed.）. Sage Publications Inc. .
Yokochi, S., & Okada, T. (2005). Creative Cognitive Process of Art Making: A Field Study of a Traditional Chinese Ink Painter. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2-3), 241-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2005.9651482

中文

ArtPress.（2021）. 藝術高等教育裡，應帶給學生們知識還是技巧？5 個給藝大教師與學生的共同思考. https://theartpressasia.com/2021/04/13/what-art-school-should-provide-knowledge-or-technique-five-issue-for-both-student-and-artist-in-the-art-school/
何文玲. (2011). 藝術與設計實務研究相關概念之分析. 藝術研究期刊, 7, 27-57.
何文玲. (2014). 藝術實務導向研究論文結構與寫作模式 [The Thesis Structure and Writing Model for Art Practice-led Research]. 視覺藝術論壇(9), 48-76.
何文玲、嚴貞. (2011). 藝術與設計「實務研究」應用於大學藝術系學生創作發展之研究 [A Study of Art and Design Practice Research Applied to College Students' Art Creation]. 藝術教育研究(21), 85-110.
何文玲、李傳房、陳俊宏. (2013). 大學「藝術與設計實務導向研究」之教學個案：整合創作、理論與寫作 [A Case Study on Teaching Art and Design Practice-Led Research in University: Integrating Creation with Theory and Writing]. 藝術教育研究(26), 1-32.
劉婉珍. (2013). 藝術教育實踐之道:藝術專業大學的潛力與責任. 臺灣教育評論月刊, 2(7), 頁 75-78
劉文楷. (2003). 如何畢業？怎樣展覽？─淺談新形態策劃性的畢業展. 藝術家雜誌, 307, 294-297。.
劉碧旭. (2018). 歐洲藝術學院體制的誕生 [The Naissance of European Academic Institution of Art]. 文資學報(11), 1-29.
劉碧旭. (2019). 體制化觀看的歷史轉型：法國舊體制時期藝術的養成制度與展示制度 新北市.
劉豐榮. (2004). 視覺藝術創作研究方法之理論基礎探析：以質化研究觀點爲基礎 [An Analysis of Theoretical Foundation for Research Methods of Visual Art Production: Qualitative Perpectives]. 藝術教育研究(8), 73-94.
劉豐榮. (2010). 精神性取向全人藝術創作教學之理由與內容層面：後現代以後之學院藝術教育 [Rationale and Content Dimensions for Teaching Spirituality-Oriented Holistic Artistic Production: College Art Education after Postmodernism]. 視覺藝術論壇(5), 2-27. https://doi.org/10.29523/vaf.201007.0001
劉豐榮. (2014). 藝術創作研究主體全人學習與發展之途徑：理論及個案分析 [An Approach to Holistic Learning and Development of the Subject Conducting Research in Art Production-Theory and Case Analysis]. 視覺藝術論壇(9), 2-47.
吳國淳. (1997). 戰後五十年來臺灣地區中小 學美術教育研究. 國立臺灣師範大學教育 研究所博士論文.
吳麗珍、黃惠滿、李浩銑. (2014). 方便取樣和立意取樣之比較. 護理雜誌, 61(3), 105-111. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.6224/JN.61.3.105
呂琪昌. (2016). 從實務導向研究的角度探討視覺藝術類創作論文的撰寫 [An Analysis of Writing Thesis in Studio Art: From the Perspective of Practice-Led Research]. 藝術教育研究(31), 111-145. https://doi.org/10.6622/rae.2016.31.04
巴東. (2010). 台灣高等美術教育內在發展的虛無困境 ─ 形而上價值方向的缺乏與迷惘. 近代書畫藝術發展回顧─紀念呂佛庭教授百歲冥誕國際學術研討會論文集
教育部. (2013). 藝術教育法. 全國法規資料庫 Retrieved from https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=H0170037
教育部. (2016). 學位授予法. 全國法規資料庫 Retrieved from https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=H0030010
教育部. (2018). 教育部美感教育中長程計畫－第二期五年計畫(108-112 年) 美感即生活從幼扎根・跨域創新・國際連結.
朱立元. (2013). 黑格爾的美學引論. 天津教育出版.
李京樺. (2024). 「臺灣藝術高教危機」奮力弭平社會與學院的裂縫：社會跟我想的不一樣該怎麼辦？. 典藏今藝術&投資, 08, 65-67.
李堅萍, 朱素貞, & 李學然. (2012). 視覺藝術學習者創作藝術表徵因素之個案研究 [A Case Study of the Representative Factors Regarding Visual Arts Learner's Art Creations]. 藝術教育研究(24), 47-69.
李松泰. (2001). 沙龍沿革史（ㄧ）. 台灣美術學刊, 第20期, 頁64－66.
林曼麗. (2000). 台灣視覺藝術教育研究. 雄獅.
林金定, 嚴嘉楓, & 陳美花. (2005). 質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析 [Qualitative Research Method: Models and Steps of Interviewing]. 身心障礙研究季刊, 3(2), 122-136. https://doi.org/10.30072/jdr.200506.0005
楊孟哲. (1999). 日治時代臺灣美術教育. 台 北：前衛出版社.
洪雅琳. (2008). 大學美術系畢業生高等專業藝術教育之個案研究 彰化縣。.
王筑筠. (2003). 創作過程能否被界定. 美育, 135, 78-79.
王麗雁. (2008). 臺灣學校視覺藝術教育發展概述. 臺灣視覺藝術教育史. 臺北市: 國立台灣藝術教育館, 105-161.
王麗雁. (2010). 臺灣學校視覺藝術教育發展概述. In 鄭明憲編 (Ed.), 臺灣藝術教育史. 台北: 藝術教育.
王麗雁、鄭明憲. (2011). 蛻變中的成長：臺灣視覺教育百年. 美育, 180, 頁6-15.
紐耶羅. (2017a, 2022,10,02). 創作型論文 — 創作什麼，研究什麼？. https://www.practitioners-lab.org/creation-as-essay
紐耶羅. (2017b, 2022/10/03). 尋找屬於自己的脈絡：反思的重要. https://www.practitioners-lab.org/importance-of-reflection
葉育男、劉建成、鄧成連. (2021). 以詮釋取徑之創作歷程的探索. 華梵藝術與設計學報, 14, 20-52. https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20160114002-202108-202109070014-202109070014-20-52
蔡沛容. (2018). 藝術創作歷程創造力指標建構之研究：後設認知的觀點. 國際藝術教育學刊, 16:1, 148-223. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A18023046
許吟如, & 吳宜澄. (2010). 臺北市立教育大學視覺藝術學系碩士論文主題與研究法之探討. In 藝術學刊 (Vol. 1, pp. 71-122).
賴雯淑. (2021). 藝術家的書在陽明交大之教學藝術實踐. 42, 78-119.
賴雯淑, & 許雯婷. (2011). 詮釋取徑之藝術研究方法 [Hermeneutic Approach as an Art Research Methodology]. 藝術教育研究(22), 109-145.
郭禎祥, & 楊須美. (1988). 以艾斯納(E. W. Eisner)「學術本位的美術教育」(DBAE)為理論基礎探討現今我國國民美術教育. 師大學報, 33, 575-593.
鄧宗聖. (2013). 創作的發想: 藝術本位觀點的教學實踐. 跨界的視野.
鄧宗聖. (2016). 創作中學習:臺灣視覺媒體創作碩士之個案探究. In 藝術學報 (Vol. 12, pp. 199-231).
鄧宗聖. (2017). 創作實務與研究：創造性學習的途徑 [Creative practice and research: The learning approach in creativity]. 藝術評論(32), 23-50. https://doi.org/10.3966/101562402017010032002
陳佩佩. (2003). 從圖畫教科書看日治時期臺灣初等學校美術教育. 議藝份子, 200303 ( 5期), 頁23-40.
陳懷恩. (2024). 「臺灣藝術高教危機」學院能夠教出藝術家嗎？. 典藏今藝術&投資, 08, 44-47. https://artouch.com/art-views/issue/are-colleges-causing-mediocre-art-what-ive-heard-about-taiwans-higher-art-education-scene/content-150821.html
陳李綢. (2000). 個案研究. 心理出版有限公司.
陳靜璇, & 吳宜澄. (2011). 藝術領域研究方法之探討：以創作類研究為主之分析. In 藝術學刊 (Vol. 2).
高千惠. (2024). 「臺灣藝術高教危機」九仞高牆的裡裡外–一個圖騰與禁忌下的公共空間. 典藏今藝術&投資, 08, 48-51. https://artouch.com/art-views/issue/are-colleges-causing-mediocre-art-what-ive-heard-about-taiwans-higher-art-education-scene/content-151978.html
黃冬富. (2000). 藝術教育史概述. 桂冠出版.
黃冬富. (2006). 從台灣省立師院勞圖科到台灣省立師大藝術系─戰後初期台灣中等學校的美術師資養成教育(1947-1967). 美育, 151, 頁68-77.
黑格爾. (1997). 美學 (朱光潛, Trans.). 北京商務印書館.