Another View of Discipline Based Art Education

National Art Education Association

Another View of Discipline Based Art EducationAuthor(s): Jerome J. HausmanSource: Art Education, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Jan., 1987), pp. 56-60Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193036 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 03:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 03:40:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193036?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


As I See It Another View Another View

Another View of

D/uring times of stress and perceived imbal-

ance there is an understandable tendency to want to "get hold of things," to return to a state of stability and lower levels of ambigui-

ty. This phenomenon can be seen in groups as well as in- dividuals.

The changes taking place in our schools are creating a sense of stress and perceived imbalance. One can observe that many art educators are "under the gun" - programs are being eliminated or consolidated. The so- called "basics" are being emphasized with a view toward meeting the changing needs of our modern society.

e s such as "basics" "accountability," "learning out- e ." and "school management" are in vogue. For

the stability being sought is to be found in clearly "disciplines" and specified competencies and

0s. In the face of these emphases, many in the rt education are turning to role definitions that

r e greater focus and clarity to the teaching of Sis the assumption that greater specificity and

e e 'ed outcomes will bring greater wisdom and

I of interest and attention is being given Stonsored by The J. Paul Getty Trust,

tion in the Arts. Their efforts represent of the thrust to understand art educa-

Ae. W. Dwaine Greer (1984), Director of e -14et ducators on the Visual Arts of The

arized discipline-based art education

e-based art instruction is on art rate n and within the context of

e uedu r parent disciplines - aesthetics, nd a r d art criticism - are taught by

ea nuous, sequential, written cur- els in the same way as other

Sainst efforts to foster disciplined ?1-hbhav aviors that evidence knowledge,

Sd ding of what is being done. It's ii ST the "good" or "beautiful" to

a hfavor of disciplined behaviors. It is averya.de m ter to make assertions about "parent

ii s ould be taught at all grade levels by ,;?mean continuous, sequential, written cur-

riculU"a eway as other academic subjects. •7 i es.t.set, it should be clear that we are all for

line bevior; what is at issue are particular con- e n _frent disciplines" that need to be taught

Dr. Jerome J. Hausman

56 Art Education January 1987



Jerome J. Hausman

Discipline Based Art Education

in certain specified ways. Is the teaching of art to be approached in ways similar or identical to the teaching of behavioral or physical sciences?

Humans have been making art forms for a long, long time. Presumably there have been means by which those who made these forms have learned to use tools and shape materials. Such learning has been achieved through various means. Formal schooling, as we know it, is a relatively recent development in human history. The simple and obvious fact is that much learning takes place without the benefits of a "formal, continuous, sequential, written curriculum." All of this is not to argue against the desirability of formal schooling or even sequential learning; it is to observe that there are other critical factors that need to be considered in concep- tualizing and carrying out educational programs in the arts.

Our literature abounds with statements about the im- portance of the arts in human experience. However, try as we might, we cannot arrive at all-inclusive assertions that would fix our definition as to the nature of a work of art. Perhaps this is why the philosopher Nelson Goodman (1977) observed:

I have turned my attention from what art is to what it does. He concludes, "A salient feature of symbolization is that it may come and go. An object may symbolize different things at different times, and nothing at other times. An inert or purely utilitarian object may come to function as art, and a work of art may come to function as an inert or purely utilitarian object. Perhaps, rather than art being long and life short, both are 'transient' (p. 19).

This is a point of view consistent with Morris Weitz's observation: Ido not know of one theory in the whole history of aesthetics that states truly the necessary and sufficient properties of the class of art works or of any of its subclasses (1966, p. 52).

It also is consistent with the view expressed by art historian, Rene Huyghe (1959): The more insight the history of art gives us into the necessities that form the artist, the more nearly it liberates us from the temptation of formulas, theories, and fashions, because it shows us that these things, being subject to perpetual change, are relative and vain. The only permanent thing is quality, which cannot be reduced to a formula or a definition. (p. 438).

Lest my argument be misunderstood, I hasten to add

Art Education

that there is an important function to be fulfilled in the organized teaching of art. My point is simply one that urges the realization that as in much in life (including the arts) we need to understand and appreciate the multiple perspectives and the distinctively unique responses possible in creating or appreciating a work of art. This is a point of view articulated by Jacob Bronowski (1978),

the human predicament is not that each of us is alone but that the problems of life have no unique and final solution. And the other is that the play of values in the work of art really says that we recognize ourselves in the artist as one of his creations and we recognize the whole creation in ourselves. Later he goes on to conclude,

I do not think that anywhere in life we can isolate and ultimate supreme value. The thing about life really is that you make goodness or you make the experience for yourself by constantly balancing the values that you have from moment to moment. And you have to have profound movements like that which Einstein had, and you must make profound mistakes, but you must always feel that you are exploring the values by which you live and forming them with every step that you take (p. 169).

One can make the case that dealing with the arts (indeed all of cognition) is an essentially transactive and socially mediated process. It is important that the effort to con- ceptualize content for art education from "four parent disciplines" - aesthetics, studio art, art history, and art criticism - and then prepare a formal, continuous, sequential, written curriculum across grade levels not divert or blunt our energies and interests from the more fundamental and open-minded dynamics of creating and responding to works of art. In the push to "establish ourselves" as being the same as other academic subjects, it is important to beware that we are not selling our souls or catering to values alien to the very disciplined behaviors we seek to encourage.

There are multiple perspectives for viewing or using the term "discipline." Among them, there is the politically persuasive use of the term. As was noted at the outset, in a time of stress and imbalance there is a welcome and reassuring ring to the promise of a more "disciplined" approach to teaching. Similarly, it sounds good to identify what is being done as constituting a "discipline.'"There are, however, a number of view- points that come to the fore when we look further into the meanings and implications associated with what is admittedly a politically persuasive term. Still to be faced are the issues of just what we mean when we use the

January 1987 57



term "discipline" in relation to the teaching of art. Looking to the literature in art education, it is in-

teresting to note that there have been arguments about whether art education is itself a "discipline." It was Manuel Barkan (1963) who observed:

Art education could become a discipline if it would develop a distinctive structure (p. 4) . . . the central concern of art education is the teaching of art. And the teaching of art is distinguishable from, though un- doubtedly related to, the making of art itself, its history, its criticism and philosophy, or the behavior of people who make and look at works of art for whatever pur- poses which could be attributed to them. Furthermore, the central concern of art education for the teaching of art distinguishes it from teaching in general, because the teaching of art differs from, though it does resemble in some respects, the teaching of other subjects (p. 6).

A discipline can be recognized if there are the reciprocating structures of concept and syntax - ideas, beliefs, assumptions, and goals on the one hand; and a pattern of procedures, methods of inquiry and characteristic strategy on the other. . . In the realm of conceptual structure, my opinion is that the field of art education rates a plus mark. The realm of syntactical structure however, draws a minus score. . . What is lacking in sufficient degree is an adequate syntactical structure - a strategy which holds in continuous focus the relationships between ends and means, purpose and procedure, for learning experiences (p. 8).

We should all be grateful to the leadership of the Get- ty Trust in bringing to the fore questions that reach to the heart of what art education is all about. The issues raised are likely to be helpful for us all. The tenets set forth by the Getty Project make clear assertions about the need for a "formal, continuous, sequential, written curriculum across grade levels in the same way as other academic disciplines." While I do not agree with all of the tenets of discipline-based art education as stated by the Getty leadership, I welcome their efforts to focus upon the concept of discipline as it applies to the teaching of art.

In each person's lifetime there are countless experiences that can be said to be educational. Were one to chronicle each of these moments, the resultant record would include planned and unplanned happenings, pain- ful and enjoyable events, and deliberate and spontaneous actions. Yet, all of these moments taken together com- prise one's life experience; they help structure our readiness and expectations for future encounters.

I'm confident that my own educational experience parallels others in the observation that I have been in- fluenced by many people. In the course of living one's life there are many whose wisdom and understanding have helped shape my priorities and values. Among them have been my teachers and, among them, my art

58 Art Education

teachers. Some memories are vividly implanted and easi- ly recalled; others are imbedded in a vague, shifting mass of recollection where I wonder,"who did what? when? and under what precise circumstances?;" and still others are in that area beyond recall, yet I know that there have been experiences that have helped bring me to my sense of the present.

The artist-teachers that I have known have helped me to cherish those wonderful moments of discovery, satisfaction, surprise, power, control, and respect for materials that accompany making things. In his book, Mind-Storms Seymour Papert (1980) wrote of his own falling in love with gears.

"This is something that cannot be reduced to purely "cognitive' terms. Something very personal happened, and one cannot assume that it would be repeated for other children in exactly the same form (p. viii).

Each individual must find his or her own predispositions and interests. For me, it was making things - usually drawings and paintings, sometimes work with clay or wood. As time went on, different teachers brought differing skills and abilities (sometimes technical, other times attitudinal) to my conscious awareness. In retrospect, I now see that there were differing emphases and competencies giving rise to differences in learning outcomes. Just as the world of visual experience is infinite in its richness and variety, the possibilities for artistic outcomes are virtually limitless (circumscribed only by the nature of media and ideas).

Rather than arguing the case for four "parent disciplines" that shape the content for the teaching of art, I would assert that we can be accountable to a "multi disciplined base" that includes studio practice, art history, aesthetics, art criticism, psychology, philosophy, history, literature, science - indeed, the full range of our human knowledge. Life's experience becomes the context in which the study of art is undertaken. Teaching art invites an examination of one's knowledge, attitudes, and experience. It is not as if each person has to reinvent the wheel. Each of begins with a great deal that has been given - our language, cultural patterns, and values in the visual arts. This includes a fantastic variety of forms and techniques. How is it possible for any one teacher to cover the vast area im- plied by a multi-disciplined base? The answer quite simply is that each teacher would shape the content for instruction using his or her own experience and the context of the classroom situation - the developmental and cultural priorities of students as well as the available teaching resources and time. We need to balance the skills of planned and predictable actions with those of improvisation and creative adaptation. There would not be a precisely prescribed sequence that would mandate the same teaching at each grade level. The content for art instruction involves particular ideas and values that can be realized in a variety of ways.

January 1987



ln? .......... I

D i -s-- MW

a mI'M-we& 'arm"

-b a Zs d Art Just as artists have focused upon a myriad of subject

matters and made choices as to their medium of expression, a teacher working with students should be challeng- ed and encouraged to shape those conditions that would then motivate and help students to engage in creative activities involving making or responding to works of art.

Of course, each individual teacher may be called upon to present a written curriculum, outlining particular con- cepts and activities to be developed in the classroom. Within each school, there should be teacher exchange and coordination as to curricula being prepared. Indeed, within each school district or system, there can be general points of coordination. Whereas there can be very specific, operational (even sequential) plans in an individual teacher's curriculum plan, the planning at the district or system level should be more generalized in- viting alternative approaches within each classroom that might meet the generalized outcomes being sought

I am mindful that the majority of teachers dealing with art in the nation's elementary schools do so without formal training in the field. Moreover, there are feelings of insecurity and inadequacy as they approach the pro- spect of the arts in their classrooms. These feelings are frequently passed on to their students. All of this is the reason that we need art specialists at all grade levels to work with teachers and students in planning and carrying out art programs.

The position being put forward here calls for another way of thinking about curriculum in the visual arts. As I have written in Curriculum Theory Network (1974):

What intrigues me is the problem of making teachers aware of virtually infinite possibilities in structuring teaching in the arts. More crucially, my concern has become one of trying to conceive of curricula in a way that honors the critical role to be played by the teacher in structuring (timing, sequencing, emphasizing) events that go in the classroom (p. 193).

Choices should be made that maximize available strengths.

As the painter approaches the canvas or the sculptor begins to shape wood or clay, teachers need to feel their own strength, commitment, and enthusiasm for work to be undertaken. This is so much more likely when they draw upon their own interests and abilities. The subjects and themes for art activities or the objects or images for study should come from felt enthusiasms and available resources. Factors of personal interests and abilities as well as factors of natural advantage (local museums, art centers, and artists) should weigh heavily. Of course, there are the interests of the students themselves.

My concern is that system wide, prescribed curricula sequences with necessary emphases in art history, art criticism, and aesthetics; written mandates as to learning in these areas; and the desire to make art like other academic disciplines will result in greater rigidities and a more intimidating climate for the teaching of art. Those

Art Education

who feel inadequate will be made to feel even more inadequate.

Rather than projecting a single, linear, and sequentially-based series of learning activities, the view of curriculum from which I would proceed involves recognizing varying alternatives that might be linked or clustered in varying ways depending upon the unique circumstances of a particular teacher's interests, the motivation and readiness of students, and the resources of the community. Each teacher, working with students, should be invited to give shape to activities that draw upon the disciplines of studio work, art history, art criticism, aesthetics, and all other disciplines connected to the work underway. In this way, curriculum planning can become individualized planning.

David W. Ecker offered an excellent analysis of the "art process as a problem-solution-problem continuum." He concluded with the observation that

qualitative problem solving is a mediation in which qualitative relations as means are ordered to desired qualitative ends (1966, p. 68).

From this point of view, there is no absolute scale of quality for the arts. Yet the great works of the past re- tain their greatness by virtue of strengths that continual- ly challenge and inform us. Comparisons of works past and present have helped to identify and test our criteria. Through such comparisons we establish relative stan- dards to be applied to our emerging experience.

In the current period of stress and perceived imbalance it is important that we focus upon the distinctive strengths of the arts in human experience along with the personal strengths of teachers and students. We need to aggressively assert and demonstrate these strengths through our actions. At its best, effective teaching of art is an artistic and deeply personal endeavor. To be sure, such teaching draws upon content derived from studio experience, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics. However, at its core is a more individualized and per- sonalized sense of value. There are the insights developed when artists or students struggle with media and materials in the shaping of visual form; when an art historian comes to understand the place of a work in the historical context of human activity; when the art critic becomes clearer as to the judgments made about specific works of art; and when the aesthetician formulates specific reasons for the judgments being made. These are the disciplined ends I would seek to encourage in response to the perceptions of stress and imbalance regarding the arts in our schools. D

Jerome J. Hausman is a Professor of Art Education at the Massachusetts College of Art, Boston, (on leave 1986-87) and is currently a Visiting Professor at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

January 1987 59



References Barkan, M. (1963). Is there a discipline of art education. Studies in

Art Education, 4 (2), 4-9. Bronowski, J. (1978). The visionary eye: Essays in the arts,

literature, and science. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. Ecker, D.W. (1966). Qualitative problem solving. In E.W. Eisner &

D.W. Ecker (Eds.), Readings in art education. Waltham, MA.: Blaisdell.

Goodman, N. (1977). When is art? In D. Perkins & B. Leondar

(Eds.), The arts and cognition. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Hausman, J. (1974). Mapping as an approach to curriculum planning. Curriculum Theory Network, 4 (2/3), 192-198.

Huyghe, R. (1959). Ideas and images in world art: Dialogue with the visible. New York: H. N. Abrams.

Papert, S. (1980). Mind-storms. New York: Basic Books. Weitz, M. (1966). The nature of art. In E.W. Eisner & D.W. Ecker

(Eds.), Readings in art education. Waltham, MA.: Blaisdell.

Impeccable

CRAFTSMANSHIP Artistic

EXPRESSION Graphic Design Industrial/interior Design Packaging Design Medical Illustration Painting Printmaking Painting-Illustration Printmaking-Illustration Computer Graphics Design Art Education Ceramics/Ceramic Sculpture Glass Metalcrafts/Jewelry Weaving/Textile Design Woodworking/Furniture

Design

Rochester Institute of Technology

School of Art and Design School for American Craftsmen College of Fine and Applied Arts One Lomb Memorial Drive Rochester, NY 14623

CCS - COLLEGE OF ART AND DESIGN

CENTER FOR CREATIVE STUDIES

245 East Kirby Detroit. Michigan 48202

The College offers a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree in the following majors:

Art Direction Illustration

Graphic Design Fine and Applied Arts Photography

Medical Photography Audio-Visual Production Product/Package Design

Transportation Interior Design

Painting Printmaking

Sculpture Fabric Design

Blown and Stained Glass Ceramics and Metals and Jewelry.

Minor concentrations are available in: Art Therapy

Film and Video Computer Graphics.

UTRECHT SAVING SYSTEM

GREAT SAVINGS

BUYING DIRECT FROM UTRECHT. A MAJOR MANUFACTURER "* Prolessional

Artists' Colors "* Stretchers "* Paper Converters

BUY OTHER

MANUFACTURER'S PRODUCTS AT IMPRESSIVE SAVINGS * Majir Brands * Thousands of Items

FREE CATALOG UTRECHT MANUFACTURING CORP. "33 Thirty FIfth Street Brooklyn. N.Y. 11232

Telphone iS718) 76S-2525 ART AND DRAFTING SUPPLY CENTERS

NEW YORK CITY * 111 FourthAvenue, New York N.Y. 10003

BOSTON * 333 Mass. Ave.. Boston. Mass 02115

CHICAGO *332So Michigan Ave.. Chicago. 111. 60604

PHILADELPHIA * Utrecht at Philadelphia College of Art

Spruce St. (off So Broad St.) Phil.. Pa 19102 WASHINGTON. D.C.

* 1250 EyeSt.. N.W.. Washington. D.C. 20005

60 Art Education January 1987



Documents

Another View of Discipline Based Art Education