Bursting paradigms: a colour wheel of practice-research

n this article, I question practice as a research paradigm by exploring its position in relation to non-positivist qualitative methodologies. Frayling’s [1994. Research in art and design. Royal College of Art Research Papers, 1(1), 1993/4] distinctions between research into, through, and as (for) practice are expanded to explore overlaps between these approaches. I argue for the need to understand the nuances of different epistemologies and ontologies that underpin diverse disciplinary approaches to practice-research. This is done through an analysis of a selection of Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC)-funded projects to find out how they are using and/or embedding practice in the research process. The resulting Colour Wheel of Practice-Research illustrates a spectrum of positions of practice in relation to research, suggesting existing research paradigms are bursting at the seams and that the “disciplinary matrix” of practice might offers other ways of knowing. The reason I have chosen to focus primarily on AHRC-funded projects is because it explicitly states its support of “practice-led research” and that it “remains dedicated to this area of research”. This article aims to add to knowledge of how and why practice-research is of continuing interest to research councils, universities, and those identifying as practice-based/led researchers.