THE PRACTICE: PEDAGOGICAL CONTEXT -- Choice-based art education supports multiple modes of learning and teaching.
Content Presented By:
Teaching for Artistic Behavior Partnership

Research Summary for Pedagogical Context

Using this concept of teaching, educators have at their disposal a number of strategies for sharing information and can assume a variety of roles, including instructor, model, observer, and coach. Direct teaching has an important place in the choice-based classroom (Denning, 1998). Effective, focused demonstrations provide efficient means of communication and present information relating to the challenges and problems that the students face (Douglas, 1993; Stankiewicz, 2001; Saphier, 1987; Johnson & Johnson, 1990; Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Dunn & Larson, 1990; Saphier, 1987). Whole-group teaching is one of the ways knowledge flows in the classroom yet describes only one of the roles of the teacher. Because students are encouraged to choose independent work, the teacher is able to work with small groups and even one-to-one with students (Tinzmann, et. al., 1990). When teachers do not have to be constantly at the head of the class, they are able to model art making, which is an effective teaching technique (Earnst, 1994; Holt, 1983; Tinzmann, et al, 1990). As an observer, the teacher can monitor student behavior, pinpoint problems, plan for future demonstrations, and highlight the amazing discoveries that emerge in the course of a day's class (Earnst, 1994; Douglas, 1993; Davilla & Koenig, 1998; International Reggio Exchange; Johnson & Johnson, 1990; Dunn & Larson, 1990; Szekely, 1991). The observant teacher, freed from micromanagement of the class, can facilitate happenings in the art room (CYERT; Dunn, 1990; Omaois, 1998; Rettig, 1999; Tinzmann, et. al., 1990; Brooks & Brooks, 1993). By observing student progress, the teacher can also plan for appropriate future content (Tinzmann, et. al., 1990; Chapman, 1992; Parks, 1992; Saphier, 1987). In this model, a key role for the teacher is as coach and encourager of each student's independent work (Read, 1956; Tinzmann, et. al., 1990; Johnson & Johnson, 1990).

The students themselves provide an enormous part of the pedagogy in the choice-based art class. Peer tutoring and collaborative learning happen organically, organized by the students. Students who work with a particular medium or line of thought over time gain an expertise that they can share with their classmates, thereby becoming student experts (Rettig, 1999; Szekely, 1988). The knowledge and self-esteem gained in this manner has an extensive research base (Ede, 1987; Goodlad & Hirst, 1989; www.mathforum.org; Ngeow, 1988; Panitz, 1999; Johnson & Johnson, 1990; Dunn & Larson, 1990). In addition, student-initiated work that emerges in a holistic manner can ensure that the multiple intelligences of students have the opportunity to find expression (Rettig, 1999; Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Szekely, 1988; Saphier, 1987; London, 1989; Assoc. Human Psychology; Gardner, 1990; Jenson, 2001).

The teacher's goal is to create a community of artists, where the discourse and observations of each other's work can enlighten students and teacher alike (Johnson & Johnson, 1990; www.mathforum.org; Russell, 2002; Szekely, 1988; Thompson, 2002; Thompson & Bales, 1991; Ulbricht, 1999; Brooks & Brooks, 1993; London, 1994). This community can possess many aspects of the communities of practicing adult artists (Guggenheim, 1998).

The larger community of world artists, past and present, is an important influence in the choice-based classroom. When given large print and virtual resources, students are able to connect with the work of artists in a way that is personal and, therefore, more meaningful and useful to their work (Guggenheim, 1998; Katan, 1990; Szekely, 1991).

Such an emergent, open-system curriculum, which is oriented to the big-picture as opposed to being linear and sequential, allows students to learn at their best, to be fully engaged and able to take on the role of artists (Williams, 1983; Jenson, 2001, Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Dunn & Larson, 1990; Kowalchuk, 1999; London, 1994; Szekely, 1988; Stankiewicz, 2001; Rettig, P. & Rettig, J., 1999; Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Dunn & Larson, 1990).

References

Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Barth, R.S. (1971). Open education: Assumptions about children's learning. In C.H. Rathbone (Ed.), Open education: The informal classroom. New York: Citation Press.

Chapman, L. (1982). Instant art, instant culture. New York: Teachers College Press.

Innovations in early education: The international Reggio exchange 3(4). Retrieved August 2002 from the Cyert Center Program for Collaborative Learning Web site. Access: http://www.cmu.edu/cyert-center/reggio.htm

Davilla, D. & Koenig, S. (1998). Bringing the Reggio concept to American educators. Art Education, 51 (4), 18-24.

Denning, P. (1998). The professional teacher. Inventio, 1 (1). Retrieved August 2002 from http://www.doit.gmu.edu/Archives/feb98/pjd_2.htm

Douglas, K. (1993). Centers-based art education. Unpublished master's thesis, Cambridge College, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Dunn, S. & Larson, R. (1990). Design technology: Children's engineering. New York: The Falmer Press.

Ede, L. (1987, March). The case for collaboration. Paper presented at the 38th annual meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Atlanta, Ga. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED282212)

Ernst, K. (1994). Picturing learning: Artists and writers in the classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Gardner, H. (1990). Multiple intelligences: Implications for art and creativity. In W. Moody (Ed.), Artistic intelligences: Implications for education. New York: Teacher College Press.

Goodlad, S. & Hirst, B. (1989). Peer tutoring: A guide to learning by teaching. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Guggenheim Museum. (1998). After mountains and sea: Frankenthaler 1956-1959. New York: Author.

Holt, J. (1983). How children learn. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Jensen, E. (2001). Arts with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Johnson, D., Johnson, R., Holubec, E. (1990). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.

Katan, E. (1990). Beyond art history...and before...and beyond...and before. Art Education, 43 (1), 60-69.

Kowalchuk, E. (1999). Recognizing and using higher order approaches to teaching art. Art Education 52 (8), 13-18.

London, P. (1994). Step outside: Community-based art education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

London, P. (1989). No more secondhand art. Boston: Shambhala.

Lowenfeld, V. & Brittain, W. (1964). Creative and mental growth. New York: Macmillan.

Ngeow, K. (1998). Enhancing student thinking through collaborative learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED422586.)

Omaois, M. (1998, October). The teacher is a facilitator. Health CyberMag, 1 (1). University of Philippines-Manila.

Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Panitz, T. (1999). Collaborative versus cooperative learning: A comparison of the concepts which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED448443.)

Parks, M. (1992). The art of pedagogy: Artistic behavior as a model for teaching. Art Education, 45 (5), 51-57.

Read, H. (1956). Education through art. New York: Pantheon Books.

Rettig, P. & Rettig, J. (1999). Linking brain research to art. Art Education, 52 (6), 19-24.

Rowan, J. (2001). Humanistic education. A guide to humanistic psychology. Retrieved August 2002 from the Association for Humanistic Psychology Web site. Access: http://www.ahpweb.org/rowan_bibliography/chapter17.html

Russell, J. (2002, June 30). "Matisse Picasso": Rival geniuses who struck sparks off each other. New York Times. Retrieved August 2002 from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/30/arts/design/30RUSS.html

Stankiewicz, M. (2001). Roots of art education practice. Worcester, MA: Davis Publications.

Szekely, G. (2000). Painting in the year 2000. Art Education, 53 (5), 12-18.

Szekely, G. (1991). Discovery of experiences in art history for young children. Art Education, 44 (3), 41-49.

Szekely, G. (1988). Encouraging creativity in art lessons. New York: Teachers College Press.

Saphier, J. & Gower, R. (1997). The skillful teacher. Acton, MA: Research for Better Teaching.

Thompson, C. (2002, April). Drawing together: Peer influence in preschool and kindergarten art classes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, La.

Thompson, C. & Bales, S. (1991). Michael doesn't like my dinosaurs: Conversations in a preschool art class. Studies in Art Education, 33, 43-45.

Tinzmann, M.B., Jones, B.F., Fennimore, T.F., Bakker, J., Fine, C., & Pierce, J. (1990). What is the collaborative classroom? Retrieved August 2002 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/collab.htm

Ulbricht, J. (1999). The art of teaching: Learning from invisible teachers. Art Education, 52 (5), 39-43.

University of Western Australia. (1997, April). Peer tutoring. Alternative Modes of Teaching and Learning. Retrieved August 2002 from http://www.csd.uwa.edu.au/altmodes/to_delivery/peer_teaching.html

Williams, L. (1983). Teaching for the two-sided mind. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Yaacob, N.M. (1997, December 17). Looking at collaborative learning from a designer's point of view. Message posted to http://mathforum.org/epigone/cl/fronzarpor/twum1g46odao@forum.swarthmore.edu

[top]

This resource is developed and maintained by The Education Alliance at Brown University. Seed funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Education. Send comments to: loom@alliance.brown.edu