Everyone Has a Neil: Possibilities of Literacy Desiring in Writer's Studio (Kuby & Gutshall Rucker)
-and-
The Art of Engaging Young Men as Writers (Franco & Unrath)
In the two articles, we begin by focusing on the fact that "children teach US about writing if we give them permission to play-with-materials, listen, watch carefully, and then respond by opening curricular spaces for them to live out their literacy desirings as multimodal writers" (pgs. 314-315). Products can be very diverse and teach us about individuality in creation. But we find that the future and the end products are not necessarily the focus of either article. It is in the process where the learning really occurs. What is becoming as children are in the process of creating? During the process, students are invited to collaborate with peers to strengthen pieces by listening to recommendations. Similarly, in VTS, "participants consider and contribute diverse perspectives to group meaning-making" (p. 27).
The aim of the authors in the Neil article was to "demonstrate the sophisticated and collaborative literacy desirings of children when they are given time, space, materials, and permission to create multimodally" (p. 315). In VTS, there is an emphasis on visual literacy, where "through the acts of viewing, responding, and visually representing during the prewriting phase" (p. 28).
In Neil's classroom, Tara had to be thoughtful in her planning and know her curriculum expectations well so that she could be more flexible and embrace the unexpected ways her students created their stories. Tara began by putting out lots of different materials for writing, then witnessed the children "intra-acting-with-materials," while in VTS (during the discussions), there are carefully sequenced visual art images that engage and sustain learners. From observation (in the Kuby article), the authors noted that the children were not always "intentional and/or sure about what they were creating" with their wide variety of materials. "At times, Tara stepped in and shared examples from previous years or from her own experiences, so a child who needed more prompting had a range of options to consider" (p. 316), while in VTS, the teacher stays neutral without contributing information or insight into dialogue. Discussions are facilitated, not directed in VTS, much like the peer conversations in the Kuby article. However, main questions are focused and repeated in VTS to keep the conversation moving and new ideas forming from one piece of artwork.
Neil's creations were fissures that departed from "expected ways of being." For instance, experiences with Neil's inventive personal narrative game demonstrates that "the writing process or cycle is not always linear" (p. 319), as we discussed in class on the 11th. An interesting question is then posed: how do I, as a teacher, embrace fissures in my teaching plans? Do I allow freedom from "proper" and "conventional" techniques as both articles showcase? Do I allow individual interpretations as an "additional avenue for understanding and responding" (p. 29)?
Lastly, I thought it was interesting that both articles discussed allowing the exploration of aggression and conflict (in these cases, among boys) within the classroom environment. I have always struggled with knowing how to address these types of output with students, and it makes sense that students need space to "bring in pop culture and their experiences outside of school even if they are steeped with violence and injustices" (p. 323) and it motivates their passions and provides them with opportunities to share their interests with others, like the partnership between Neil and Zane.
We have to trust that children need time to play with materials so they can create for themselves, but also teach others how to use materials in various ways as well...as the VTS article mentions, these are ways to stimulate "literacy achievement in ways that more common instructional approaches do not" (p. 28). This type of play leads to a positive self-efficacy within students because they are experimenting with their own ideas and it is leading them to thinking that they might not otherwise apply. They are taking risks, persevering through tough choices and using their peer relationships to expand their ideas even further.
Friday, June 12, 2015
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Reading Summary #3
For this reading summary, I'm going to attempt to combine my discussion of the three readings since they contained similar information. I'm leaning heavily on the What Works article, because it was by far my favorite reading of the evening because of the examples used and the ease with which the author wrote.
I read the Practice Theory chapter first and appreciated that it discussed examples of quantitative and qualitative data in an easy to understand way really helped me. On page 52, I highlighted that "Yes/No questions or Likert-style questions are likely to work well" in quantitative research, while in a qualitative case study, using interviews is a good method of data collection. Another important note was that the quality of data is more important than the quantity. I always feel like when I have had to write research papers in the past that I struggled to find the right number of data sources (mostly because I didn't know what I was really looking for until now), but I will admit I never paid as much attention to the quality.
Quantitative data still seems to be kind of daunting to me (and "not very sexy" according to Brewer in the Inquiry text), and qualitative data sources seem so much more interesting or real in the type of research I am drawn to, such as those involving face-to-face interactions. But quantitative research is needed in our field because it "provides a foundation for understanding relationships between conducting research, teaching, and assessment" (p. 125).
I was so drawn to the examples mentioned in the What Works article, beginning with the analogy that researchers are like collectors. However, "unlike a collector who simply accumulates, as a researcher you have a focused purpose: to answer the question you've developed using the information you've gathered" (p. 69). When beginning to collect data, the author suggests to start "with the source that brought you to your question in the first place." I also liked these suggestions for finding data everywhere:
In addition to her research journal, she includes interviews, written responses by the interviewees, and field notes.
"Using yourself as a data source is essential" (p. 71)
"Many teacher-research projects depend almost entirely on collections of student work" (p. 72)
As for interviewing, when we "allow the conversation to take it's natural course, it will hold far more value than if you stage it using predesigned questions whose answers you've already anticipated" (p. 75)
I also like the challenge on page 80 to list data sources I haven't considered.
Finally, when analyzing data and finding results, presenting straightforward facts is key, so organizing data into a conclusion and in a way that makes sense is very important. The Inquiry text definitely was an easy read to help me break down qualitative research in a way that I understood better. Hey, as mentioned in the What Works article, even "at my age I still see that major growth is possible for me" -Jan Reeder (p. 70).
Side note: I know Kenzie mentioned this on Lore, but the fact that the Inquiry AND the Practice Theory texts are literally coming apart at the seams is DRIVING ME BANANAS!!!!!!!
---AAAAAAAND *scene*---;)
I read the Practice Theory chapter first and appreciated that it discussed examples of quantitative and qualitative data in an easy to understand way really helped me. On page 52, I highlighted that "Yes/No questions or Likert-style questions are likely to work well" in quantitative research, while in a qualitative case study, using interviews is a good method of data collection. Another important note was that the quality of data is more important than the quantity. I always feel like when I have had to write research papers in the past that I struggled to find the right number of data sources (mostly because I didn't know what I was really looking for until now), but I will admit I never paid as much attention to the quality.
Quantitative data still seems to be kind of daunting to me (and "not very sexy" according to Brewer in the Inquiry text), and qualitative data sources seem so much more interesting or real in the type of research I am drawn to, such as those involving face-to-face interactions. But quantitative research is needed in our field because it "provides a foundation for understanding relationships between conducting research, teaching, and assessment" (p. 125).
I was so drawn to the examples mentioned in the What Works article, beginning with the analogy that researchers are like collectors. However, "unlike a collector who simply accumulates, as a researcher you have a focused purpose: to answer the question you've developed using the information you've gathered" (p. 69). When beginning to collect data, the author suggests to start "with the source that brought you to your question in the first place." I also liked these suggestions for finding data everywhere:
In addition to her research journal, she includes interviews, written responses by the interviewees, and field notes.
"Using yourself as a data source is essential" (p. 71)
"Many teacher-research projects depend almost entirely on collections of student work" (p. 72)
As for interviewing, when we "allow the conversation to take it's natural course, it will hold far more value than if you stage it using predesigned questions whose answers you've already anticipated" (p. 75)
I also like the challenge on page 80 to list data sources I haven't considered.
Finally, when analyzing data and finding results, presenting straightforward facts is key, so organizing data into a conclusion and in a way that makes sense is very important. The Inquiry text definitely was an easy read to help me break down qualitative research in a way that I understood better. Hey, as mentioned in the What Works article, even "at my age I still see that major growth is possible for me" -Jan Reeder (p. 70).
Side note: I know Kenzie mentioned this on Lore, but the fact that the Inquiry AND the Practice Theory texts are literally coming apart at the seams is DRIVING ME BANANAS!!!!!!!
---AAAAAAAND *scene*---;)
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
Reading Summary / Research Translation #2
Practice Theory Chapter 5:
This chapter "focuses on how researchers put together all the parts in order to formulate a sound study" (p. 37). Researchers will choose their methodologies to approach their research in a way that is flexible but within some parameters. Some methodologies frequently used in art education are action research (to enhance and study one's own practice), arts-based research (to include the art process), case study (to involve in-depth observation of the teaching strategies of an individual or a small group), ethnographic research (to investigate the cultural system of a group), historical research (to collect, evaluate, synthesize, and interpret data related to past events), narrative/autobiographical research (to tell the stories of everyday experiences of participants), portraiture research (to represent a person or situation in an in-depth manner), quasi-experimental research (to study cause and effect relationships), survey research (to describe or characterize a large group of people from a small representative sample), and theoretical research (to analyze key features of a concept in order to make connections to a particular field).
Methodology can also be categorized as quantitative or qualitative; quantitative being structured data that can be measured, and qualitative being a method where the focus is on the qualities of the situation or phenomenon being researched. After narrowing down one's research topic to a research problem to a purpose statement, one must narrow further to a focused question or hypothesis, which also considers methodology. I appreciated the breakdown on page 43 that mentioned creating quantitative vs qualitative research questions"if a researcher's approach to a study is quantitative, the researcher will likely deal with a hypothesis, a prediction about the relationship among variables, or a yes/no question" while qualitative researchers choose questions that "seek to understand", "explore a process", or "report the stories."
It was interesting to read the two short glimpses into the plans of the case study and action research study. These are good examples of how to break down a plan of attack before beginning research.
A/R/Tography Chapter 5:
W-O-W. Nicole Porter's chapter was amazing and totally energized me after a long day of reading about research processes! Last summer in Survey, I started toying with the idea to do training with art teachers (both in and outside my district) to begin to think of themselves as artist-teachers (culminating in a gallery exhibition) for my master's project, and this chapter gave me great insight and resources to continue working toward that goal. Some quotes that I absolutely loved were:
"I struggled at first to meld the two persons of artist and teacher" (p. 105)
"What's it for? What is it for, anyway? Students make art because they are in a class and the teacher marks it. WHY would a teacher make something?" (p. 106)
"For me it is not possible to separate the artist 'within' from the art teacher 'without'" - Laurie Ball
"The artist nurtures the teacher by keeping in touch with the very processes and material she wishes to teach, and the teacher feeds the artist by allowing more time and experience to objectify those very personal processes through art history and art criticism and aesthetics" -Laurie Ball
"I want for my students what I have with my own art--an enjoyment and satisfaction that comes with creation for myself, not for some arbitrary judge. I want them to see themselves as artists" (p. 107)
"The artist-teacher model is essential to good pedagogy" -George Szekely
Seeing Porter's work in the classroom "encouraged students to reflect on how they created pieces and helped them not to be too focused on the end result" (p. 112) *side note, I've been trying to find a way to discuss with the librarian at my school that I would like to be help her with a new creative space at school that she is in charge of (why, I'm not really sure...but I digress) and I thought that Porter's student explained what I've been trying to explain to her in terms of my place there as a specialist in the area (I'm paraphrasing to fit my needs) It's a way for students to see where they can look to to get ideas, not to rip them off, but to look at and say, this is how a particular process works, now how can I change it and make my own.
I love the idea of the weekly studio night (or afternoon in my case), where students could come in and work on their own projects. I want students to see themselves as artists and see the classroom as a studio, their studio to create their work. I am coming closer to transforming myself into an artist-teacher. It's still a struggle for me to "find the time"...aka the oldest excuse in the book, and one that the author would argue is not a healthy relationship with either passion. But I want to be able to connect to my students on the level Ms. Porter does with her students. I want to see the ways practicing my own art can effect the way I teach. I want to experience Porter's model that was a catalyst for change in her classroom.
Research Translation - Inquiry in Action Chapter 16:
I will straight-up admit that after reading the last, wonderful article in A/R/Tography, this one was a STRUGGLE to get through. I didn't feel like this article lined up very well with the translation criteria, but then again, I'm not sure I was doing it right...
Research Problem: The research problem was broadly stated as a focus on the evaluation of partnership programs in Art Ed and transformative evaluation as research. The research was discussed as being important because of the need for art educators to evaluate their programs (with administrators and curriculum planners) so that they could determine and reflect on the efficacy and impact of their program and strengthen programs where needed. If I am understanding correctly, the term "program evaluation" was defined involving: the systematic use of a variety of research methodologies and instruments; investigation based on established program goals, often of curriculum or partnership programs; determinations regarding the effectiveness of programs; recommendations for making decisions about program continuation or change; multiple stakeholders, including higher education, classroom teachers, community partners, and students; and transformative, reflexive practice, leading to self-efficacy on the part of art educators and arts organizations.
The goals in the example study were clearly stated, but it did seem like there was a lot of varying information that they were trying to get out of their groups.
Literature Review: The review of previous research is well organized, and seem to be relevant. The oldest source cited was a Dewey article from 1934, and the second oldest was from 1994. The most current was from 2011.
The was not a literature review at the end of the example.
Research Questions or Hypotheses: A question posed by the author was "why do art educators need to know about program evaluation?" One of the answers given was that it is essentially because of funding, but the author stated that it was more important for teachers to evaluate their programs so that they understand the impact of their lessons, off-site partnerships that are effected, and opportunities afforded by their program.
Another question was "is evaluation really research?" which I thought was a more important question, given the main focus of the article. The author answers this by graphing the similarities and differences between evaluation and research.
Data Sources/Sampling: In the example study mentioned, it says "stakeholders" were partnered with the external evaluator to "contribute to research skills and guide practitioners to reflect on the data in order to formulate programmic recommendations"...so for this type of research it seems that the data sources are varying?
Measurement Tools: I think I need someone to describe what this would look like in this type of study? I'm not sure what I'm looking for here.
Methodology/Procedures: In the example study, it states that the "methodology for data collection and analysis included group interviews with the fine arts team and 4th-grade teachers, two electronic surveys of teachers, and group interviews with 4th-and 5th-grade students (would this be the data source?) The rest of the procedures are very clearly stated: there was an initial meeting to discuss the various programs, there was an initial survey given because "teacher-reported survey data was vague", and then there was a follow-up survey to determine how the program was utilized the remainder of the year...but it says only eight teachers responded, whereas in the first survey given, 22 faculty members responded.
Results: the results of the example study were easy enough to understand, but the conclusions drawn from the survey were all over the place and it seems like focusing in on one area might have made for a more meaningful report. At the end of the chapter, the author states that because goals-based evaluations are conducted to determine how programs are functioning, it seems like the research was answered in the way it should have been, but it seems like a very convoluted process to me. Granted, because of the way this type of research is conducted, the good thing is that the study ends with recommendations for restructuring the program. Since the results did not have very consistent participation, I don't know how accurate the results were, so consequently, many people may be unhappy with the suggestions for restructuring.
I am so open to redirection if I wasn't looking at the correct information when answering these questions! I feel like I was kind of off-track with this translation!
This chapter "focuses on how researchers put together all the parts in order to formulate a sound study" (p. 37). Researchers will choose their methodologies to approach their research in a way that is flexible but within some parameters. Some methodologies frequently used in art education are action research (to enhance and study one's own practice), arts-based research (to include the art process), case study (to involve in-depth observation of the teaching strategies of an individual or a small group), ethnographic research (to investigate the cultural system of a group), historical research (to collect, evaluate, synthesize, and interpret data related to past events), narrative/autobiographical research (to tell the stories of everyday experiences of participants), portraiture research (to represent a person or situation in an in-depth manner), quasi-experimental research (to study cause and effect relationships), survey research (to describe or characterize a large group of people from a small representative sample), and theoretical research (to analyze key features of a concept in order to make connections to a particular field).
Methodology can also be categorized as quantitative or qualitative; quantitative being structured data that can be measured, and qualitative being a method where the focus is on the qualities of the situation or phenomenon being researched. After narrowing down one's research topic to a research problem to a purpose statement, one must narrow further to a focused question or hypothesis, which also considers methodology. I appreciated the breakdown on page 43 that mentioned creating quantitative vs qualitative research questions"if a researcher's approach to a study is quantitative, the researcher will likely deal with a hypothesis, a prediction about the relationship among variables, or a yes/no question" while qualitative researchers choose questions that "seek to understand", "explore a process", or "report the stories."
It was interesting to read the two short glimpses into the plans of the case study and action research study. These are good examples of how to break down a plan of attack before beginning research.
A/R/Tography Chapter 5:
W-O-W. Nicole Porter's chapter was amazing and totally energized me after a long day of reading about research processes! Last summer in Survey, I started toying with the idea to do training with art teachers (both in and outside my district) to begin to think of themselves as artist-teachers (culminating in a gallery exhibition) for my master's project, and this chapter gave me great insight and resources to continue working toward that goal. Some quotes that I absolutely loved were:
"I struggled at first to meld the two persons of artist and teacher" (p. 105)
"What's it for? What is it for, anyway? Students make art because they are in a class and the teacher marks it. WHY would a teacher make something?" (p. 106)
"For me it is not possible to separate the artist 'within' from the art teacher 'without'" - Laurie Ball
"The artist nurtures the teacher by keeping in touch with the very processes and material she wishes to teach, and the teacher feeds the artist by allowing more time and experience to objectify those very personal processes through art history and art criticism and aesthetics" -Laurie Ball
"I want for my students what I have with my own art--an enjoyment and satisfaction that comes with creation for myself, not for some arbitrary judge. I want them to see themselves as artists" (p. 107)
"The artist-teacher model is essential to good pedagogy" -George Szekely
Seeing Porter's work in the classroom "encouraged students to reflect on how they created pieces and helped them not to be too focused on the end result" (p. 112) *side note, I've been trying to find a way to discuss with the librarian at my school that I would like to be help her with a new creative space at school that she is in charge of (why, I'm not really sure...but I digress) and I thought that Porter's student explained what I've been trying to explain to her in terms of my place there as a specialist in the area (I'm paraphrasing to fit my needs) It's a way for students to see where they can look to to get ideas, not to rip them off, but to look at and say, this is how a particular process works, now how can I change it and make my own.
I love the idea of the weekly studio night (or afternoon in my case), where students could come in and work on their own projects. I want students to see themselves as artists and see the classroom as a studio, their studio to create their work. I am coming closer to transforming myself into an artist-teacher. It's still a struggle for me to "find the time"...aka the oldest excuse in the book, and one that the author would argue is not a healthy relationship with either passion. But I want to be able to connect to my students on the level Ms. Porter does with her students. I want to see the ways practicing my own art can effect the way I teach. I want to experience Porter's model that was a catalyst for change in her classroom.
Research Translation - Inquiry in Action Chapter 16:
I will straight-up admit that after reading the last, wonderful article in A/R/Tography, this one was a STRUGGLE to get through. I didn't feel like this article lined up very well with the translation criteria, but then again, I'm not sure I was doing it right...
Research Problem: The research problem was broadly stated as a focus on the evaluation of partnership programs in Art Ed and transformative evaluation as research. The research was discussed as being important because of the need for art educators to evaluate their programs (with administrators and curriculum planners) so that they could determine and reflect on the efficacy and impact of their program and strengthen programs where needed. If I am understanding correctly, the term "program evaluation" was defined involving: the systematic use of a variety of research methodologies and instruments; investigation based on established program goals, often of curriculum or partnership programs; determinations regarding the effectiveness of programs; recommendations for making decisions about program continuation or change; multiple stakeholders, including higher education, classroom teachers, community partners, and students; and transformative, reflexive practice, leading to self-efficacy on the part of art educators and arts organizations.
The goals in the example study were clearly stated, but it did seem like there was a lot of varying information that they were trying to get out of their groups.
Literature Review: The review of previous research is well organized, and seem to be relevant. The oldest source cited was a Dewey article from 1934, and the second oldest was from 1994. The most current was from 2011.
The was not a literature review at the end of the example.
Research Questions or Hypotheses: A question posed by the author was "why do art educators need to know about program evaluation?" One of the answers given was that it is essentially because of funding, but the author stated that it was more important for teachers to evaluate their programs so that they understand the impact of their lessons, off-site partnerships that are effected, and opportunities afforded by their program.
Another question was "is evaluation really research?" which I thought was a more important question, given the main focus of the article. The author answers this by graphing the similarities and differences between evaluation and research.
Data Sources/Sampling: In the example study mentioned, it says "stakeholders" were partnered with the external evaluator to "contribute to research skills and guide practitioners to reflect on the data in order to formulate programmic recommendations"...so for this type of research it seems that the data sources are varying?
Measurement Tools: I think I need someone to describe what this would look like in this type of study? I'm not sure what I'm looking for here.
Methodology/Procedures: In the example study, it states that the "methodology for data collection and analysis included group interviews with the fine arts team and 4th-grade teachers, two electronic surveys of teachers, and group interviews with 4th-and 5th-grade students (would this be the data source?) The rest of the procedures are very clearly stated: there was an initial meeting to discuss the various programs, there was an initial survey given because "teacher-reported survey data was vague", and then there was a follow-up survey to determine how the program was utilized the remainder of the year...but it says only eight teachers responded, whereas in the first survey given, 22 faculty members responded.
Results: the results of the example study were easy enough to understand, but the conclusions drawn from the survey were all over the place and it seems like focusing in on one area might have made for a more meaningful report. At the end of the chapter, the author states that because goals-based evaluations are conducted to determine how programs are functioning, it seems like the research was answered in the way it should have been, but it seems like a very convoluted process to me. Granted, because of the way this type of research is conducted, the good thing is that the study ends with recommendations for restructuring the program. Since the results did not have very consistent participation, I don't know how accurate the results were, so consequently, many people may be unhappy with the suggestions for restructuring.
I am so open to redirection if I wasn't looking at the correct information when answering these questions! I feel like I was kind of off-track with this translation!
Reading Summary / Research Translation #1
(This is just a draft of what I have completed regarding this assignment so that I can move on to #2...as a placeholder so that my posts will be in order when I finish this one. Yes, I'm OCD like that ;))
Inquiry in Action Chapters 1-3:
The first chapter of Inquiry in Action focuses on the "why" of research (why it is socially relevant) and the steps that should be taken in the research process. In contemporary art education, we must constantly determine what constitutes art knowledge NOW, according to author Kerry Freedman. Knowledge is constructed by individuals and groups and is always changing depending on context. Art education, specifically, "functions at the intersection of the visual arts and the social sciences," (p. 1) which makes art educators well-equipped for researching and documenting the relevance of art for all students and the culture they live in.
Research creates new knowledge and helps "contribute to the intellectual domain and growth of the professional field, enabling other researchers to construct arguments" that can "guide practice, support changes in policy, and advance student learning" (p. 2). A researcher must first establish research goals in order to find theories that support and/or answer questions that might emerge as "holes" in their field. A researcher should also establish goals that could help people "maintain a sense of vision by working at the edges of research and theory" in order to push boundaries that were previously established (p. 3). Because the "quality of a research project is determined, in part, by whether it results in new knowledge" a researcher must form questions on which to base their research that are written in a clear manner, questions that are answerable, and questions that are relevant to theory development in their field and practice. Next, the researcher must develop research skills so that they can "review, critique, and construct better arguments" (p.6). And finally, the researcher must construct a theory based on their research. "It is the relationship between theory and practice that promotes critical dialogue and establishes the fluid boundaries of art education, connecting members of the field through their collaborative development of this relationship, and helping to establish a professional community" (p. 5).
The next chapter discusses what the researcher needs to know about the process of researching. Good advice about choosing a topic, designing a proposal, and seeking evidence, are all given in examples that are broken down into easy to follow worksheets, though I will admit that it definitely still seems daunting.
Chapter 3 breaks the research process down even further (specifically focusing on the literature review) by discussing how to begin the search for articles that can be used for an annotated bibliography without it seeming like finding a needle in a haystack. Using these tips then helps the researcher fine-tune their research goal, noting that the "search and review process should not be limited to the beginning of the study, but should be considered an integral and ongoing activity" (p.27). Rereading often, and seeking peer reviews helps ensure a tight and thoughtful paper, and providing appropriate headings and subheadings helps guide the researchers thinking to help direct the reader to the conclusion. As Smilan states, "a well-established literature review will lend credibility to your study. The literature you read will ultimately help you to formulate your research interests and support your discussion of results and research conclusions" (p. 27).
Practice Theory Chapter 3:
Research Translation:
Oddly, the article I chose (before I read the Inquiry chapters) just happened to be one co-authored by Kerry Freedman (the article's other author is Patricia Stuhr). I picked the article because the title, Curriculum Change for the 21st Century: Visual Culture in Art Education, drew me because of the ideals we have discussed in this program for years. After a preliminary read-through, it definitely seemed to be an article that tied in with my group's topic: Art Teacher Practice/Innovation in Art Education. When I began to type and took notice of the author's names, I realized I had read Kerry Freedman's work in previous classes and in the aforementioned chapters.
The questions are clearly stated as the article discusses the importance of a shift from traditional practices in fine arts teaching, toward a more broad range of cultural studies within visual arts. The authors state that the purpose of the writing is to "discuss art education in terms of the broadening realm of visual culture and to theorize about curriculum change". They go on to mention that though visual culture has begun to have a place in art education, much work still needs to be done to "promote appropriate interpretations and applications of visual culture."
Inquiry in Action Chapters 1-3:
The first chapter of Inquiry in Action focuses on the "why" of research (why it is socially relevant) and the steps that should be taken in the research process. In contemporary art education, we must constantly determine what constitutes art knowledge NOW, according to author Kerry Freedman. Knowledge is constructed by individuals and groups and is always changing depending on context. Art education, specifically, "functions at the intersection of the visual arts and the social sciences," (p. 1) which makes art educators well-equipped for researching and documenting the relevance of art for all students and the culture they live in.
Research creates new knowledge and helps "contribute to the intellectual domain and growth of the professional field, enabling other researchers to construct arguments" that can "guide practice, support changes in policy, and advance student learning" (p. 2). A researcher must first establish research goals in order to find theories that support and/or answer questions that might emerge as "holes" in their field. A researcher should also establish goals that could help people "maintain a sense of vision by working at the edges of research and theory" in order to push boundaries that were previously established (p. 3). Because the "quality of a research project is determined, in part, by whether it results in new knowledge" a researcher must form questions on which to base their research that are written in a clear manner, questions that are answerable, and questions that are relevant to theory development in their field and practice. Next, the researcher must develop research skills so that they can "review, critique, and construct better arguments" (p.6). And finally, the researcher must construct a theory based on their research. "It is the relationship between theory and practice that promotes critical dialogue and establishes the fluid boundaries of art education, connecting members of the field through their collaborative development of this relationship, and helping to establish a professional community" (p. 5).
The next chapter discusses what the researcher needs to know about the process of researching. Good advice about choosing a topic, designing a proposal, and seeking evidence, are all given in examples that are broken down into easy to follow worksheets, though I will admit that it definitely still seems daunting.
Chapter 3 breaks the research process down even further (specifically focusing on the literature review) by discussing how to begin the search for articles that can be used for an annotated bibliography without it seeming like finding a needle in a haystack. Using these tips then helps the researcher fine-tune their research goal, noting that the "search and review process should not be limited to the beginning of the study, but should be considered an integral and ongoing activity" (p.27). Rereading often, and seeking peer reviews helps ensure a tight and thoughtful paper, and providing appropriate headings and subheadings helps guide the researchers thinking to help direct the reader to the conclusion. As Smilan states, "a well-established literature review will lend credibility to your study. The literature you read will ultimately help you to formulate your research interests and support your discussion of results and research conclusions" (p. 27).
Practice Theory Chapter 3:
Research Translation:
Oddly, the article I chose (before I read the Inquiry chapters) just happened to be one co-authored by Kerry Freedman (the article's other author is Patricia Stuhr). I picked the article because the title, Curriculum Change for the 21st Century: Visual Culture in Art Education, drew me because of the ideals we have discussed in this program for years. After a preliminary read-through, it definitely seemed to be an article that tied in with my group's topic: Art Teacher Practice/Innovation in Art Education. When I began to type and took notice of the author's names, I realized I had read Kerry Freedman's work in previous classes and in the aforementioned chapters.
The questions are clearly stated as the article discusses the importance of a shift from traditional practices in fine arts teaching, toward a more broad range of cultural studies within visual arts. The authors state that the purpose of the writing is to "discuss art education in terms of the broadening realm of visual culture and to theorize about curriculum change". They go on to mention that though visual culture has begun to have a place in art education, much work still needs to be done to "promote appropriate interpretations and applications of visual culture."
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Five Minds for the Future by Howard Gardner
Howard Gardner writes in his book Five Minds for the Future that “there are certain kinds of minds
people will need if they—if we—are to thrive in the world during eras to come”
(page 1). These minds have each
been important throughout time and each can continuously be developed in our
students and ourselves. The five
minds are the disciplined mind, the synthesizing mind, the creative mind, the
respectful mind, and the ethical mind.
Each mind has differences, but each can, and should, overlap in order for
one to become a well-rounded individual.
The disciplined mind relates to the intellect of a person,
one who has studied at least ten years and has mastered at least one way of
thinking. Because this is a more
scholarly approach to learning, the vernacular must be honed in a particular
subject. A disciplined individual, therefore, masters
key literacies enabling them to build upon previously learned information and
encourage them to continue to develop their research in areas that interest
them. In the art classroom,
a disciplined mind can be developed by practicing technical skills and offering
historical information about art and artists.
A person with a synthesizing mind “takes information from
disparate sources, understands and evaluates that information objectively, and
puts it together in ways that make sense” (page 2). Gardner states that there are eight types of synthesis:
narratives, taxonomies, complex concepts, rules and aphorisms, powerful
metaphors (as well as images and themes), embodiment without words, theories,
and metatheory. This mind helps
prove that actual learning has taken place in students by allowing them to
teach what they have been taught.
It shows the transference of information happening within the
classroom. Specifically,
in the art classroom, an individual with a synthesizing
mind would develop multiple and diverse visual representations to embody
an idea in their personal artwork as well as interpret big ideas and questions
posed by other artists in their work.
While the first three minds are important in order to
succeed individually, without the respectful mind to welcome differences
amongst peers, a person will flounder in the outside world. A respectful person seeks to understand
other cultures and listens to the opinions and virtues of another to have the
ability to work with others toward a common goal. Strategies for this mind in the art classroom are
prevalent. Art educators can have
students view artifacts and visual images from other cultures and use Visual
Thinking Strategies and critiques in order to learn to engage in respectful
dialogue with one another. As
educators in general, we should be cognizant of the way we are modeling
respectful relationships amongst different groups.
Lastly, the ethical mind “ponders the nature of one’s work
and the needs and desires of the society in which one lives” (page 3). The ethical mind bounces off of the
respectful mind in a more abstract way by conceptualizing “how workers can
serve purposes beyond self-interest and how citizens can work unselfishly to
improve” (page 3). An educator’s
role is vastly important in developing this mind because of the fact that
children are spending more of their waking hours at school than anywhere
else. As with the respectful mind,
modeling is important in fostering the ethical mind in students. Students want to be a part of a
structured classroom where they are part of the rule-making process. Showing students that fairness,
truthfulness, loyalty, and integrity are important in the art classroom will
encourage them to use ethical rules outside of the classroom.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Blog Reflection Day 4: Facilitating Engagement with the Art-Making Process
One of the sections in Outcome III of Carroll's text is Facilitating Dialogue and Discourse About Student Work. In it, Carroll says that including critiques and adding dialogue into the art classroom helps cultivate the community within the classroom and helps students discover meaning in their artwork and the work of others. Learning to respect the processes and value "making and responding to art" is a crucial part of our jobs as art educators. This particular section came at the perfect time considering Mary Franco came in to discuss Visual Thinking Strategies with our class prior to doing this reading.
A couple of the ways Carroll (via Barrett) suggests engaging students in serious and thoughtful discussions are by: placing "primary responsibility for talking during the critique on the viewers of the artwork"; being "a facilitator of thoughtful discussions" and "preventing random, unconnected, and ill-conceived comments"; carefully formulating questions; placing emphasis on interpreting versus evaluating. All things we would encourage and do during VTS.
So I searched for an article with these suggestions in mind and found this one called Tools to Enhance Young Children's Thinking by Angela K. Salmon. In it, Salmon talks about creating "thinking routines" with students in order to promote critical thinking skills in students as young as elementary age. She describes a technique called See/Think/Wonder which is almost exactly like VTS, down to asking similar questions like "what makes you say that?" to help students interpret their answers with proper justification. Asking proper questions, Salmon says, "help children see that thinking goes beyond recognizing objects and memories to being a method for solving problems and understanding the world" (page 30).
Building a culture of thinking is key to helping give the arts footing in it's fight for relevance because of the link it creates between the mental processes of learning: comparing, inferring, explaining, and analyzing. A proper culture of thinking can also help students can create more meaningful artwork of their own if they understand better "what's going on inside their heads" and can become more aware of their "own language and thoughts" (page 30).
A couple of the ways Carroll (via Barrett) suggests engaging students in serious and thoughtful discussions are by: placing "primary responsibility for talking during the critique on the viewers of the artwork"; being "a facilitator of thoughtful discussions" and "preventing random, unconnected, and ill-conceived comments"; carefully formulating questions; placing emphasis on interpreting versus evaluating. All things we would encourage and do during VTS.
So I searched for an article with these suggestions in mind and found this one called Tools to Enhance Young Children's Thinking by Angela K. Salmon. In it, Salmon talks about creating "thinking routines" with students in order to promote critical thinking skills in students as young as elementary age. She describes a technique called See/Think/Wonder which is almost exactly like VTS, down to asking similar questions like "what makes you say that?" to help students interpret their answers with proper justification. Asking proper questions, Salmon says, "help children see that thinking goes beyond recognizing objects and memories to being a method for solving problems and understanding the world" (page 30).
Building a culture of thinking is key to helping give the arts footing in it's fight for relevance because of the link it creates between the mental processes of learning: comparing, inferring, explaining, and analyzing. A proper culture of thinking can also help students can create more meaningful artwork of their own if they understand better "what's going on inside their heads" and can become more aware of their "own language and thoughts" (page 30).
Friday, June 6, 2014
Blog Post Day 4: Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party
I chose Encounter 14 (or find the download here) the final encounter, because it seemed like an idea that my upper elementary students would be able to grasp and have fun with. The ideas included in the encounter that students could use for investigation include:
*thinking about who would be invited to their dinner party, what would be served, how the food would be served, etc.
*role playing the women who were included at the table of The Dinner Party.
*role playing women newly invited to the table: women from history or from contemporary times (students should also consider women who have had influence on them personally!).
*designing their own table settings/dining room for their personal dinner party.
While I think it's very important to make the connection to women in history, I like the idea of including women important to my students so they can have a personally meaningful experience while making their own artwork. It would be fun to have a real dinner party at the end of the unit and invite the women my students created the artwork for. As the guests of honor, we would let them use the table setting and hear about why they are an important guest at their student's dinner party.
*thinking about who would be invited to their dinner party, what would be served, how the food would be served, etc.
*role playing the women who were included at the table of The Dinner Party.
*role playing women newly invited to the table: women from history or from contemporary times (students should also consider women who have had influence on them personally!).
*designing their own table settings/dining room for their personal dinner party.
While I think it's very important to make the connection to women in history, I like the idea of including women important to my students so they can have a personally meaningful experience while making their own artwork. It would be fun to have a real dinner party at the end of the unit and invite the women my students created the artwork for. As the guests of honor, we would let them use the table setting and hear about why they are an important guest at their student's dinner party.
 |
| Image courtesy: http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/images/eascfa/dinner_party/place_settings/TDP_Place_Settings_Sig.jpg |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)