Each year a world-leading researcher is selected by a competitive process for the Sir William Dobell Visiting Chair award in the ANU Centre for Art History and Art Theory. This advanced research seminar provides students the opportunity to study the topics of current research by the Sir William Dobell Visiting Chair.

Students may complete this course twice for a maximum credit value of 24 units, provided they enrol in a different topic in each instance/semester. Please note that the seminar will change each semester to align with the Visiting Chair's work, allowing students to develop professional research skills by aligning their study and assessments with the Chair's research. Please refer to the class summary for the specific term in which you wish to enrol for a detailed description.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

1. evaluate a subfield of art history and curatorial studies in a sophisticated and nuanced fashion to reveal past and current debates in academia and in public discourse;
2. design a professional research project, accounting for the complexities of institutional and public politics;
3. question how to make a substantive contribution to research beyond the immediate field of art history and curatorial studies; and
4. work collaboratively to a professional standard as part of a research team while taking responsibility for specific tasks.

Research-Led Teaching

Material in this course is directly related to the lecturer's research and publishing agenda.

Semester 2 - 2026

Dr Erica Seccombe

Collaborations: shared ground, shared vision.

This semester, we will explore collaboration as both a creative practice and a critical methodology within art history, curatorial practice, and contemporary visual culture. Together, we will examine how artists, curators, communities, institutions, and researchers work across disciplinary, cultural, and social boundaries to produce new forms of artistic, curatorial, and cultural knowledge. Through historical and contemporary case studies, students will investigate how collaboration challenges traditional notions of individual authorship, reshapes creative processes, and transforms the ways exhibitions, artworks, and cultural projects are conceived and realised.

Throughout the course, we will consider collaboration as a dialogic process grounded in shared vision, negotiation, trust, and mutual respect. Particular attention will be given to cross-cultural and community-based collaborations, where questions of ethics, reciprocity, care, representation, and power become central to creative practice. We will examine the opportunities and challenges of working collaboratively across different knowledge systems, exploring how meaningful partnerships require critical reflection, active listening, and responsiveness to cultural protocols and institutional contexts. By engaging with these diverse models of collaboration, students will develop an understanding of collaboration not simply as a way of working, but as a mode of inquiry that expands creative possibilities and contributes to contemporary debates in art history and curatorial studies.

Field Trips

Exact date of field trips TBC

Additional Course Costs

N/A

Examination Material or equipment

N/A

Required Resources

N/A

Recommended Resources

Whether you are on campus or studying online, there are a variety of online platforms you will use to participate in your study program. These could include videos for lectures and other instruction, two-way video conferencing for interactive learning, email and other messaging tools for communication, interactive web apps for formative and collaborative activities, print and/or photo/scan for handwritten work and drawings, and home-based assessment.

ANU outlines recommended student system requirements to ensure you are able to participate fully in your learning. Other information is also available about the various Learning Platforms you may use.

Staff Feedback

Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:

• written comments
• verbal comments
• feedback to whole class, groups, individuals, focus group etc

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). Feedback can also be provided to Course Conveners and teachers via the Student Experience of Learning & Teaching (SELT) feedback program. SELT surveys are confidential and also provide the Colleges and ANU Executive with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement.

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	Introduction
2	Models of Collaboration	ASSESSMENT 1 begins on a weekly schedule
3	Collaboration and the Foundation of Artistic Movements
4	Collaboration and Power	ASSESSMENT 2 due
5	Collaboration in Indigenous and Decolonial Contexts
6	Collaboration and Technology
7	Institutional and Organisational Collaboration
8	Failure in Collaboration
9	Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary collaborations
10	Feminist and Queer Approaches to Collaboration
11	Presentations	ASSESSMENT 3 Due (scheduled presentations)
12	Presentations	ASSESSMENT 3 Due (scheduled presentations)

Tutorial Registration

ANU utilises MyTimetable to enable students to view the timetable for their enrolled courses, browse, then self-allocate to small teaching activities / tutorials so they can better plan their time. Find out more on the Timetable webpage.

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Return of assessment	Learning Outcomes
Weekly reading discussion (25 min)	15 %	05/08/2026	*	1,2,3,4
Research Question and Annotated Bibliography (2,000 words)	20 %	17/08/2026	26/08/2026	1,2,3,4
Research Presentation (2,000 words, 15 min)	25 %	21/10/2026	30/10/2026	1,2,3,4
Final Research Essay (4,000 words)	40 %	08/11/2026	09/12/2026	1,2,3,4

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines , which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Integrity Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

• Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
• Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure
• Extenuating Circumstances Application
• Student Surveys and Evaluations
• Deferred Examinations
• Student Complaint Resolution Policy and Procedure
• Code of practice for teaching and learning

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the Academic Skills website. In rare cases where online submission using Turnitin software is not technically possible; or where not using Turnitin software has been justified by the Course Convener and approved by the Associate Dean (Education) on the basis of the teaching model being employed; students shall submit assessment online via ‘Canvas’ outside of Turnitin, or failing that in hard copy, or through a combination of submission methods as approved by the Associate Dean (Education). The submission method is detailed below.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Participation

IN PERSON

Assessment Task 1

Weekly reading discussion (25 min)

Each week, one student will be nominated as the Discussion Adjudicator. The adjudicator is responsible for facilitating the seminar by introducing the week's reading, identifying its key arguments and debates, posing questions that encourage critical discussion, ensuring all participants have the opportunity to contribute, and drawing together the major ideas discussed. Contributions should demonstrate critical engagement with the readings, identify key debates, relate the material to broader art-historical and curatorial contexts, and respond thoughtfully to others' perspectives.

All students are expected to complete the weekly readings before class and actively contribute to seminar discussions. Students will also submit a short discussion prompt or reflection each week. (100 words per week x 10)

Rubric

CRITERIA	FAIL	PASS	CREDIT	DISTINCTION	HIGH DISTINCTION
Critical Engagement with Scholarship	Demonstrates little understanding or relies primarily on description or summary.	Demonstrates basic understanding with limited critical engagement.	Demonstrates sound understanding and some critical analysis beyond summary.	Communicates ideas with exceptional clarity, organisation, and professionalism, using appropriate academic language and disciplinary terminology.	Demonstrates sophisticated evaluation of the reading, identifying underlying assumptions, methodologies, and scholarly debates with originality and insight.
Understanding of Art Historical and Curatorial Debates	Fails to connect the reading to wider disciplinary issues.	Makes limited or superficial connections to broader debates.	Demonstrates an understanding of the broader context with some relevant connections.	Clearly connects the reading to relevant debates and contexts.	Insightfully situates the reading within broader historical, theoretical, and contemporary debates, demonstrating a nuanced understanding of the field.
Contribution to Collaborative Discussion	Rarely participates or leads discussion, and/or contributions do not demonstrate preparation.	Participates inconsistently and/or contributions remain largely descriptive.	Participates regularly with relevant contributions and engagement.	Makes thoughtful and well-informed contributions while responding constructively to peers.	Consistently advances discussion through insightful questions, constructive responses, and engagement that deepens collective understanding. Demonstrates leadership within seminar discussions..
Clear Communication	Communication is unclear, disorganised, and/or inappropriate for postgraduate study.	Communication is understandable and/or lacks clarity or precision.	Communication is generally clear and appropriately structured.	Communicates clearly and professionally with minor lapses.	Communicates ideas with exceptional clarity and organisation, using appropriate academic language and disciplinary terminology.

Assessment Task 2

Research Question and Annotated Bibliography (2,000 words)

Research Question: How does collaboration produce new forms of artistic, curatorial, social, historical and/or theoretical outcomes?

Using this overarching question as a point of departure, develop a research question that investigates collaborative practice in art history, curating, museums, or contemporary art.

Your research question should identify a specific collaborative practice, case study, institution, exhibition, collective, methodology, or theoretical problem that can be explored through scholarly research. Through an annotated bibliography, critically evaluate the key scholarly debates surrounding your chosen topic and identify how your project will contribute to current discussions within the field.

Your 2000 word submission should include:

1. A research question (min 100 words). Clearly state your research question, explain the rationale and identify the scope of your investigation.
2. An annotated bibliography (10 scholarly sources) Each annotation should contain a citation presented in the required referencing style. Bullet points are acceptable. Summarise the central argument, methodology, and contribution. Evaluate the strengths and limitations of the source. Explain how it contributes to existing scholarly debates. Identify its relationship to other sources in your bibliography. Reflect on how it informs your own research project.

Appropriate sources include: peer-reviewed journal articles; scholarly books; edited book chapters; doctoral dissertations; exhibition catalogues with substantial scholarly essays.

Additional non-scholarly sources may be referenced if they are relevant to your research, but they cannot be included as part of the required ten scholarly sources.

Rubric

CRITERIA	FAIL	PASS	CREDIT	DISTINCTION	HIGH DISTINCTION
Research Question and Project Design	The research question is unclear, unfocused or inappropriate. The rationale is absent or demonstrates little understanding of the proposed research project.	Develops a broadly relevant research question but the rationale or scope lacks clarity, focus or sufficient	Develops a relevant research question with an appropriate rationale and scope. Demonstrates a sound understanding of the proposed topic, although the focus or justification may require further refinement.	Develops a well-focused and feasible research question supported by a clear rationale. Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the topic and defines an appropriate scope for investigation.	Develops an insightful, focused and feasible research question that demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of collaborative practice. The rationale is compelling, clearly articulating the significance, scope and direction of the proposed research project.
Critical Evaluation of Scholarship	Demonstrates limited engagement with scholarly literature. Sources are poorly selected, inadequately evaluated or largely descriptive.	Demonstrates a basic understanding of the literature but relies primarily on summary. Limited critical evaluation or synthesis of scholarly debates is evident.	Demonstrates sound engagement with the literature and identifies key arguments and debates. Some critical evaluation is evident, although analysis may occasionally remain descriptive.	Demonstrates thorough critical evaluation of scholarly literature. Identifies and compares key debates, methodologies and perspectives with clear insight.	Demonstrates sophisticated critical evaluation and synthesis of the scholarly literature. Identifies relationships between authors, methodologies and theoretical perspectives, revealing nuanced understanding of key debates.
Research Context and Significance	Does not demonstrate an understanding of current scholarly debates or explain the significance of the proposed research.	Demonstrates limited understanding of current scholarly debates. The relationship between the proposed project and existing scholarship is only explained in broad terms.	Demonstrates an understanding of current scholarly debates and explains how the proposed research relates to existing scholarship. The significance of the project is adequately articulated.	Clearly identifies current scholarly debates and positions the proposed research within them. Explains the significance of the project with a well-developed justification.	Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of current scholarly debates by identifying significant themes, tensions and gaps in the literature. Clearly positions the proposed research within these discussions and convincingly explains its significance for art history, curatorial studies and related fields.
Scholarly Communication and Research Practice	The submission is poorly organised or incomplete. Referencing is inaccurate or absent, source requirements are not met, and academic writing does not meet postgraduate expectations.	The submission communicates the required information but contains weaknesses in organisation, academic writing, source selection, or referencing that reduce its scholarly quality.	Presents a coherent submission using appropriate scholarly sources. Writing and referencing are generally accurate, with only minor errors that do not impede understanding	Presents a well-organised and clearly written submission using appropriate scholarly sources. Referencing is accurate and demonstrates strong academic research practice.	Presents an exceptionally well-organised and polished written submission. Scholarly sources are carefully selected, annotations are clearly structured and insightful, and referencing is accurate and consistent throughout.

Assessment Task 3

Research Presentation (2,000 words, 15 min)

This assessment builds on the Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography. Students will present a developed version of their proposed research project, demonstrating how their ideas, sources and arguments will be structured in the Final Essay.

The presentation should clearly communicate:

• The central research question and its significance
• The key scholarly debates informing the project
• The proposed argument or line of inquiry
• How the essay will be structured
• The role of selected sources in shaping the argument

The presentation should demonstrate clear organisation, excellent visual material, academic communication and engagement with scholarly sources.

• Select high-quality visual material that is clearly relevant to your research topic and supports your argument. Images should be well-resolved, appropriately credited, and integrated into the presentation to enhance analysis rather than serve as decoration.

Rubric

CRITERIA	FAIL	PASS	CREDIT	DISTINCTION	HIGH DISTINCTION
Research Question and Argument	The project description is unrealistic or lacks a practical framework. Lacking in clarity and/or focus.	The project description and proposed framework are overly generalised. Improvements needed in clarity, practicality and/or focus.	Articulates a solid framework for the proposed project, with clear potential for development. Project description may fall down in its clarity, concisely, practicality or focus.	Articulates a realistic and focused framework for the proposed project. Clear and concise in its description.	Articulates an original, realistic and focused framework for the proposed project. Clear, concise and convincing in its description.
Engagement with Scholarly Debates	Demonstrates little or no engagement with relevant scholarly debates or sources.	Demonstrates limited engagement with scholarship. The discussion is largely descriptive, with minimal critical insight.	Demonstrates sound engagement with relevant scholarship. Some critical discussion is evident, though it may rely on description.	Demonstrates strong engagement with scholarly debates and key sources. Shows a clear understanding of major perspectives.	Demonstrates sophisticated engagement with key scholarly debates, clearly identifying relationships, tensions and gaps. Integrates sources critically to support the project.
Structure and Development of the Project	Structure is unclear or absent. Does not demonstrate how the essay will be organised.	Structure is basic or uneven. Limited explanation of how the argument will develop.	Presents a generally clear structure, though connections between sections or the argument may require further development.	Presents a clear and well-organised structure. Shows how the argument will develop across the essay.	Presents a highly coherent and logically structured project. Clearly explains how the essay will develop, with strong connections between sections and argument.
Use of Visual Material	Visual material is absent, inappropriate, or does not support the presentation.	Uses limited or poorly integrated visual material. Images may lack relevance, clarity or proper crediting.	Uses visual material that is generally relevant, though integration or quality may be inconsistent.	Uses relevant visual material that supports the presentation and is appropriately integrated and credited.	Selects and integrates high-quality visual material that is highly relevant and enhances analysis. Images are well-presented, clearly credited, and effectively support the argument.
Academic Communication and Presentation Skills	Presentation is unclear, disorganised or incomplete. Communication does not meet postgraduate expectations.	The presentation communicates basic ideas but lacks clarity, organisation, or effective delivery.	Delivers a generally clear presentation, though delivery or organisation may be uneven.	Delivers a clear and well-organised presentation with strong communication and appropriate timing.	Delivers a highly polished, engaging and professional presentation. Demonstrates excellent clarity, timing, organisation and academic communication.

Assessment Task 4

Final Research Essay (4,000 words)

This assessment is the culmination of the research project developed throughout the semester. Building on the Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography (Assessment 2) and the Research Presentation (Assessment 3), students will submit a 4,000-word research essay that presents a sustained and well-supported argument in response to their chosen research question. Students are expected to refine and strengthen their project by incorporating feedback received from the presentation, demonstrating the iterative nature of scholarly research and academic writing.

Drawing on your annotated bibliography, subsequent research, and feedback from your presentation, write a 4,000-word research essay that critically investigates your chosen topic relating to collaborative practice in art history, curating, museums, or contemporary art. The essay should move beyond describing collaborative practice to critically examining how collaboration shapes artistic production, curatorial practice, cultural knowledge, or institutional relationships.

Your essay should:

• address the research question developed in Assessment 2 (or an approved refinement of that question);
• present a clear, sustained and coherent argument;
• critically engage with relevant scholarly literature;
• analyse appropriate case studies, artworks, exhibitions, institutions or collaborative practices;
• synthesise evidence from a range of scholarly sources;
• demonstrate independent critical thinking and engagement with current scholarly debates;
• incorporate and respond to feedback received during Assessment 3.

Rubric

CRITERIA	FAIL	PASS	CREDIT	DISTINCTION	HIGH DISTINCTION
Research Question and Argument	The research question is unclear, absent, or unrelated to the essay. The argument lacks coherence or is largely descriptive.	Addresses a research question, but the argument is broad, underdeveloped, or inconsistent. Limited evidence of a sustained line of inquiry.	Presents a clear research question and a generally coherent argument. Demonstrates sound understanding of the topic, although the argument may require further refinement or depth.	Presents a focused research question supported by a well-developed, persuasive and logically structured argument. Demonstrates strong critical engagement with the topic.	Presents a sophisticated, insightful and compelling research question that is sustained throughout the essay. Develops a nuanced, original and convincing argument demonstrating exceptional critical thinking and intellectual rigour.
Critical Engagement with Scholarship	Demonstrates little engagement with relevant scholarship. Sources are inappropriate, insufficient, or used descriptively with a limited understanding of scholarly debates.	Demonstrates basic engagement with relevant scholarship but relies largely on summary. Limited critical evaluation of sources or scholarly debates.	Demonstrates sound engagement with relevant scholarly literature. Critically discusses key sources and debates, although synthesis may be uneven.	Demonstrates thorough critical engagement with scholarly literature. Synthesises a range of perspectives and clearly positions the discussion within current debates.	Demonstrates sophisticated and authoritative engagement with a broad range of scholarly literature. Critically synthesises complex debates, theoretical perspectives and methodologies with insight and independence.
Critical Analysis and Research Context	Analysis is limited, descriptive or unsupported. Little understanding of the broader research context or significance of the topic.	Demonstrates some critical analysis, but the discussion remains largely descriptive. Makes limited connections between evidence and broader scholarly or disciplinary contexts.	Demonstrates sound critical analysis and explains how the research relates to existing scholarship and collaborative practice. Evidence generally supports the discussion.	Demonstrates well-developed critical analysis supported by relevant evidence. Effectively contextualises the research within broader scholarly, institutional and curatorial debates.	Demonstrates sophisticated critical analysis that integrates evidence, theory and context to produce a nuanced understanding of collaborative practice. Makes insightful connections across disciplinary, institutional and cultural contexts.
Academic Writing, Structure and Scholarly Practice	The essay is poorly organised or incomplete. Academic writing lacks clarity. Referencing is inaccurate or absent, and scholarly conventions are not met.	The essay is adequately organised and generally understandable, but contains weaknesses in structure, academic expression, referencing or presentation.	The essay is clearly organised and written in an appropriate academic style. Uses scholarly conventions and references competently with only minor errors.	The essay is well organised, clearly written and professionally presented. Demonstrates confident academic writing, accurate referencing and effective integration of visual and textual evidence where appropriate.	The essay is exceptionally well structured, elegantly written and professionally presented. Demonstrates exemplary academic writing, meticulous scholarly practice, accurate referencing, and seamless integration of evidence throughout.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of the ANU culture as a community of scholars. The University’s students are an integral part of that community. The academic integrity principle commits all students to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support, academic integrity, and to uphold this commitment by behaving honestly, responsibly and ethically, and with respect and fairness, in scholarly practice.

The University expects all staff and students to be familiar with the academic integrity principle, the Academic Integrity Rule 2021, the Policy: Student Academic Integrity and Procedure: Student Academic Integrity, and to uphold high standards of academic integrity to ensure the quality and value of our qualifications.

The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 is a legal document that the University uses to promote academic integrity, and manage breaches of the academic integrity principle. The Policy and Procedure support the Rule by outlining overarching principles, responsibilities and processes. The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 commences on 1 December 2021 and applies to courses commencing on or after that date, as well as to research conduct occurring on or after that date. Prior to this, the Academic Misconduct Rule 2015 applies.

 

The University commits to assisting all students to understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. All coursework students must complete the online Academic Integrity Module (Epigeum), and Higher Degree Research (HDR) students are required to complete research integrity training. The Academic Integrity website provides information about services available to assist students with their assignments, examinations and other learning activities, as well as understanding and upholding academic integrity.

Online Submission

You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records. Unless an exemption has been approved by the Associate Dean (Education) submission must be through Turnitin.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Individual assessment tasks may or may not allow for late submission. Policy regarding late submission is detailed below:

• Late submission not permitted. If submission of assessment tasks without an extension after the due date is not permitted, a mark of 0 will be awarded.
• Late submission permitted. Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

Referencing Requirements

The Academic Skills website has information to assist you with your writing and assessments. The website includes information about Academic Integrity including referencing requirements for different disciplines. There is also information on Plagiarism and different ways to use source material. Any use of artificial intelligence must be properly referenced. Failure to properly cite use of Generative AI will be considered a breach of academic integrity.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Extensions may be granted for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information.
In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service – including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy.
If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes.

Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

• ANU Health, safety & wellbeing for medical services, counselling, mental health and spiritual support
• ANU Accessibility for students with a disability or ongoing or chronic illness
• ANU Dean of Students for confidential, impartial advice and help to resolve problems between students and the academic or administrative areas of the University
• ANU Academic Skills supports you make your own decisions about how you learn and manage your workload.
• ANU Counselling promotes, supports and enhances mental health and wellbeing within the University student community.
• ANUSA supports and represents all ANU students