The conceptual framework that underpins both the teaching of art in universities and colleges and what is understood as research, is examined in this paper from the point of view of the artist teacher, thus the relation between teaching, research and artistic practice provides the focus of the paper. The associated question about whether art can be taught, and can be represented as research is examined alongside the equally contentious issue concerning the way in which this is and should be undertaken. The investigation on which this paper is based was focussed by the realisation that the fit between what artists do, say and think, and models of art as a discipline, is exceedingly poor. This realisation does not necessarily invalidate discipline based curriculum models of art education per se, it merely affirms that the practical reasoning underlying curriculum discourse about art as a discipline is independent of the evidence of artistic practice and therefore the two forms of reasoning ought to be kept separate. It could also be argued that current research contexts in the visual arts similarly reveal issues related to the evidence of artistic practice that gives shape to our understanding of the discipline and the way that it is represented as research.The complexities and inherent ambiguities that exist in the artist to artist-teacher relation are contextualised in this paper against the impact of the university art department, and current research imperatives, on artist/teachers, student/artists, art education and the art world in general.