Web of Scientific Journal

At the end of the first quarter of the 21st century, we are witnessing a constant increase in the generation of knowledge: knowledge and its modes of transmission are often questioned, redefined or even cancelled. As teachers, researchers and creators, we propose to address the challenges in the transmission of knowledge specific to art in these times in which the culture industry is bursting in, with its own goals and effects, on the notion of art and its productions, in such a way that its practices are confused with those of culture, understood as the set of conventions that determine our vision of the world.
The complexity of the performance and exercise of knowledge in art undoubtedly hinders the transmission of the creative experience and the associated technical operations.We also question the teaching process, which is part of an activity without sufficiently defined guidelines, in a territory that is as fertile (sometimes) as it is uncertain.
Our aim is to focus on aesthetic education in a time in need of critique, to bring about a meeting and exchange of ideas that reflect the contemporary desire to question and redefine the specific potential of art and its transmission.
We encourage researchers, teachers and creators to send us their reflections, experiences, stratagems, essays, tactics or results related to conceptual, methodological and practical contributions to transmission in art [or its impossibility] in different contexts and circumstances. Your proposals (original and unpublished) will be submitted through the Open Journal Systems platform (www.ehu.eus/ojs/index.php/Ausart) before 22 September 2024. The file with the article will not include either the name or any element identifying its author(s) and must include:

• the title of the article (+ English translation);
• summary (a single paragraph ± 150 words) + summary in English (idem);
• up to five key words and their English translation,
• text (± 3000 words) with optional images and graphics; bibliographical references according to the Chicago author-year format.
• If possible, it is recommended to suggest the names of TWO REVIEWERS (name, 2 surnames, affiliation and e-mail address) who are specialists in the subject addressed, for the evaluation of the article. Such reviewers should not belong to the same institution as the author, nor to UPV/EHU, nor imply any conflict of interest, and may not necessarily be assigned in the review phase.

KREAREak Group