Teaching that does not promote learning makes as much sense as selling that does not promote buying.As educators, it does not matter how many art facts we serve up to our students or how many elements of art and/or principles of design we attempt to teach them if we can't do it in meaningful ways that promote actual learning. Freedman began the 2nd chapter of Teaching Visual Culture on a similar topic when she included the results of a 1997 study by the National Assessment of Education Progress that found that eighth graders tended to have a basic knowledge of media and form, but had difficulty connecting meaning to form. To me, if the educator can't help his or her students make those connections they are not promoting learning either. In their writings, both Eisner and Freedman go through various ways of making connections, finding meaning, and ways of doing both in the art classroom, and what I found so curious is the fact that we are still looking for that ONE way to do that. Just as Eisner discusses the need for both a meaningful curriculum and an imaginative teacher to promote learning in art, Freedman discusses form versus aesthetics and helped me come to the conclusion that, again, there is not only one necessary component in promoting learning.
I chose to focus mainly on Freedman's reading and Finding Meaning in Aesthetics. One of the first things Freedman discussed is how aesthetics is a two-sided coin in that it can "promote feelings of righteousness, communicate vital messages, and illustrate excellence," in positive ways but it can also have a negative impact when it seduces us into adopting stereotypes, convincing us to accept unrealistic body images, and persuades us to buy products (that most of the time we don't need), and as an elementary art teacher, I feel like I can have the same positive or negative impact on my students and how they view art—both the art they see and the art they create. Obviously we all had teachers along the way in our academic careers who supported us and influenced us positively in regards to art, or we wouldn't be doing what we're doing, and that is my goal as an art teacher, as I'm sure it is some of yours. I know that not every one of my students is going to leave 5th grade, take art classes every year in school and have a future career in visual arts, but I hope that with my teaching I can at least leave all of them with a like (or even better, a love) of art itself.
Because our topic for today was Art vs Non Art, Freedman's discussion on form versus meaning is extremely relevant. We, as artists, have some sort of big idea and/or intention behind our work and the formal aspects we use to create it (hopefully) convey those ideas and intentions to the viewer. in the end though, we do not have total control over what our audience sees in our art because they construct their own meaning. As Freedman states, our interpretations come from our individual, lived experiences. That is what I (and Eisner and Freedman kept) coming back to: Experience. As art educators it is our job to use our experiences to inform our teaching as well as our own learning in order to create those meaningful, connected EXPERIENCES for our students.
And lastly, to go along with Eisner's discussion on eliminating stagnant, repetition in art teachers and the lessons they teach, as well as Freedman's statement on our need to continually hope for the unexpected outcome, I will leave you with a quote by Bob Ross, "There are no mistakes. There are just happy accidents." And if you haven't watched his YouTube remix, you should, and can right here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLO7tCdBVrA
No comments:
Post a Comment