A mapping of the pedagogical approaches of four artist educators—Law Yuk Mui, Yim Sui Fong, Michael Leung, and Michelle Lee.
While we read and review the Time Capsules vigorously, the student projects have yet to be fact-checked in their totality. We are sharing them openly as they are with the intention of building different thresholds from which others may discover new ideas for future research or build on existing explorations. We welcome your feedback, dialogue, and discussion. This project was originally published in August 2020. Last updated December 2025.
Since the establishment of the Hong Kong Arts Development Council in 1995, arts education in Hong Kong has received increased attention and support, leading to a growth in visual arts education and informal arts learning programmes in schools and cultural institutions. Local artists have often been invited to lead or participate in these programmes, and in doing so, influenced the objectives and approaches through which art is being taught. As such, we see value in studying the pedagogical interests of artist educators as a means to understanding larger ideas and themes of arts learning that have been circulating in Hong Kong.
The aim of this research project is therefore to learn about the pedagogical approaches of artist educators in Hong Kong. We focused on investigating the following questions:
To conduct our research, we have chosen four artist educators to interview, including Yim Sui Fong and Law Yuk Mui of Rooftop Institute, Michelle Lee, and Michael Leung. All of them have ample experience with organising and/or leading arts education programmes, and have a dedicated interest in exploring alternative approaches to learning. After each interview, we transcribed and analysed our discussions to create a Venn diagram that visually represents the ways in which their pedagogical approaches overlap and differ. Unlike other projects on this platform, this is not a timeline. As learning itself is non-linear, the approaches of these artist educators have evolved gradually with no definite start or end dates. They are influenced by the art practices and pedagogical interests of each artist educator, as well as their personal experiences with both formal and informal learning. As such, our findings cannot be accurately captured on a linear timeline, whereas a Venn diagram allows us to map out the key similarities and differences in their pedagogical approaches in a non-linear, non-temporal way.
Finally, we supplemented discussions from the interviews with research on different pedagogical frameworks in and outside visual arts education. In particular, we looked at artist-led pedagogy (Pringle 2009; Burnard and Swann 2010), transformative learning (Zibechi 2012), sustainable pedagogy (Tooth and Renshaw 2009; Burns 2015), place-based pedagogy (Tooth and Renshaw 2009; Semken and Brandt 2010), and spirituality in arts education (Gradle 2007; London 2007). The research by these scholars informed our understanding of what the artist educators are trying to accomplish and the potential impacts of their pedagogical practices.
Through our research, we have identified and determined key characteristics of the pedagogical approaches these artist educators are engaged with:
We found that the four artist educators seek to move beyond traditional ways of learning by creating holistic learning experiences that encourage participants to engage their full self—physically, emotionally, and sensually. They emphasise the process of learning as a beneficial journey in itself, privileging how participants are learning over what they learn. In many ways, they are equipping their students with different learning tools so they can remain curious and actively make meaning of their world outside of the workshops. The topics of the workshops are also place-based and relevant to participants’ immediate environment and community, which makes the knowledge acquired applicable to their daily lives. All of this contributes to a kind of learning which is more intentional and fluid—a process that is not limited to educational institutions, but extends into everyday life.
Furthermore, we further identified two unifying features shared across all four artist educators that shape their pedagogical practices:
Yet, there are also differences in their approaches to teaching and learning. Law and Yim, as co-founders of Rooftop Institute, are instrumental in the direction of the organisation’s programming, but are relatively hands-off in the execution of guest programmes. Furthermore, they are interested in sharing teaching resources with the wider community. By contrast, Lee makes detailed plans in preparation for her programmes, which culminate in a clearly guided teaching experience with distinct learning objectives, as well as a session dedicated to group discussion and sharing. In comparison, as a lecturer at Baptist University, Leung attempts to create a non-hierarchical learning environment that is less structured and allows for flexible learning outcomes. The similarities and differences between each artist educator’s approach are generally shaped by different contexts, learning environments, and target audiences, which are explored in depth in our Artist Educator Profiles and Pedagogical Approaches of the Four Artist Educators sections.
Based on our findings, it is evident that the pedagogical practices of the four artist educators—Yim Sui Fong and Law Yuk Mui of Rooftop Institute, Michelle Lee, and Michael Leung—hold significant value for the development of visual arts education in Hong Kong. Through interviews and relevant literature, we have identified the similarities and differences in their pedagogical approaches, and demonstrated their benefits to both visual arts and overall education. Responding to the rigidity and limitations of the formal education system, these artist educators attempt to facilitate learning experiences that are in line with their personal artistic and pedagogical interests. The learning they promote is more holistic, intentional, and applicable to their students’ daily lives and surroundings. As mentioned, these are pedagogical practices that will be relevant and sustainable in the context of coming decades due to further and more rapid socio-ecological changes. As such, we believe it is imperative to continue to support pedagogical endeavours by local artist educators, and for the government to include them in formal discussions and conversations regarding the development of visual arts education in Hong Kong.
What we have found with this project is only the tip of the iceberg. There are so many more local artist educators to speak to and learn from, such as Zheng Bo and Natalie Lo Lai Lai, whom we briefly mentioned in our research. Our findings could also be enriched from the inclusion of student and participant feedback and perspectives, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of whether and how such approaches to arts learning impact learning experiences. As our Venn Diagram only presents an overview of the pedagogical practices of these artist educators, we also encourage further in-depth research to be conducted on the specific characteristics we have highlighted, and how they can be applied to other subjects and disciplines within the Hong Kong context.
“About Archive of the People.” Archive Of The People. Accessed September 22, 2020. https://archiveofthepeople.org/#/about.
“About Law Yuk Mui.” Law Yuk Mui. Accessed September 10, 2020. http://www.lawyukmui.com/about/.
“Artwork / L Sub: Autumn Exhibition At Hong Kong House.” Echigo-Tsumari Art Field. Accessed November 10, 2020. https://www.echigo-tsumari.jp/en/media/201016_hkhouse_lsub/.
Burnard, Pamela, and Mandy Swann. “Pupil perceptions of learning with artists: A new order of experience?” Thinking Skills and Creativity 5 (2010): 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.01.001.
Burns, Heather L. “Transformative Sustainability Pedagogy: Learning From Ecological Systems and Indigenous Wisdom.” Journal of Transformative Education 13, no. 3 (2015): 259–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344615584683.
Char, Evelyn. n.d. “The Situation Of Learning - Artist Talk.” Rooftop Institute. Accessed October 8, 2020. https://www.rooftopinstitute.org/hokhokzaap/2020/04/08/%e5%ad%b8%e5%a %b8%e7%bf%92%e4%ba%8b%e4%bb%b6%e8%ad%9c-%e8%97%9d%e8%a1%93%e5%a %b6%e5%b0%8d%e8%ab%87/.
Cheng, Kai-ming, Liz Jackson, and Wing-on Lee. “Advancing 21st Century Competencies in Hong Kong.” Asia Society Center for Global Education, February 2017. https://asiasociety.org/files/21st-century-competencies-hong-kong.pdf.
Gradle, Sally. “Spiritual Ecology in Art Education: A Re-vision of Meaning.” In Springer International Handbook of Research in Arts Education 16, edited by Liora Bresler, 16:1501– 16. Dordrecht: Springer, 2007.
“Imagination Exchange”. 學學習 Hok Hok Zaap. Accessed September 15, 2020. https://www.rooftopinstitute.org/hokhokzaap/en/learning/page/2/.
Law, Yuk Mui, and Yim Sui Fong. Interview by Crystal Li and Ruby Weatherall. Personal Interview. Hong Kong, September 15, 2020.
Lee, Michelle. Interview by Crystal Li and Ruby Weatherall. Personal Interview. Hong Kong, October 5, 2020.
Leung, Michael. Interview by Crystal Li and Ruby Weatherall. Personal Interview. Hong Kong, September 25, 2020.
London, Peter. “Concerning the Spiritual in Art Education.” In Springer International Handbook of Research in Arts Education 16, edited by Liora Bresler, 16:1479–94. Dordrecht: Springer, 2007.
Pringle, Emily. “The Artist-Led Pedagogic Process in the Contemporary Art Gallery: Developing a Meaning Making Framework.” International Journal of Art and Design Education 28, no. 2 (2009): 174–82. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2009.01604.x.
Semken, Steven, and Elizabeth Brandt. “Implications of Sense of Place and Place-Based Education for Ecological Integrity and Cultural Sustainability in Diverse Places.” In Cultural Studies and Environmentalism 3, edited by Deborah J Tippins, Michael P Mueller, Michiel van Eijck, and Jennifer D Adams, 3:287–302. Cultural Studies of Science Education. Dordrecht: Springer, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3929-3_24.
The Curriculum Development Council. “Guiding Principles, Development Strategies and Critical Success Factors.” In Learning to Learn —The Way Forward in Curriculum Development. Hong Kong: The Curriculum Development Council, 2001. https://cd1.edb.hkedcity.net/cd/EN/Content_2908/e03/chapter3_19-29.pdf.
Tooth, Ron, and Peter Renshaw. “Reflections on Pedagogy and Place: A Journey into Learning for Sustainability through Environmental Narrative and Deep Attentive Reflection.” Australian Journal of Environmental Education, no. 25 (2009): 95–104. http://www.jstor.com/stable/44656570.
Zibechi, Raúl. “Social Movements as Spaces of Learning.” In Territories in Resistance: A Cartography of Latin American Social Movements, translated by Ramor Ryan, 21–30. Oakland, CA: AK Press, 2012.
梁志剛- Michael Leung. Accessed October 8, 2020. http://studioleung.com.
“後生者 after the rain.” 學學習 Hok Hok Zaap. Published March 25, 2020. Accessed September 22, 2020.https://www.rooftopinstitute.org/hokhokzaap/happening/%E5%BE%8C%E7%94%9F%E8%80%85/.
Crystal Li and Ruby Weatherall were participants in the Hong Kong Art Workshop, a class of the Department of Art History at The University of Hong Kong in collaboration with Asia Art Archive, in 2020.
Copyright 2026 Department of Art History - University of Hong Kong
Eina typeface used with permission (for further information visit myfonts.com/collections/eina-font-textaxis)